- cross-posted to:
- linux@sh.itjust.works
- linux@lemmy.world
- linux@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- linux@sh.itjust.works
- linux@lemmy.world
- linux@lemmy.ml
Behold, a Linux maintainer openly admitting to attempting to sabotage the entire Rust for Linux project:
https://lwn.net/ml/all/20250131075751.GA16720@lst.de/
The good news is this doesn’t affect drm/asahi, our GPU driver. The bad news is it does affect all the other drivers we’re (re)writing in Rust, two so far with a third one coming.
Another choice quote, calling R4L “cancer”: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250128092334.GA28548@lst.de/
Personally, I would consider this grounds for removal of Christoph from the Linux project on Code of Conduct violation grounds, but sadly I doubt much will happen other than draining a lot of people’s energy and will to continue the project until Linus says “fuck you” or something.
As for how to move forward, if I were one of the Rust maintainers, I would just merge the patch (which does not touch code formally maintained by the dissenter). Either Linus takes the pull, and whatever Christoph says is irrelevant, or he doesn’t, and R4L dies. Everything else is a waste of everyone’s time and energy.
Edit: Sent in my 2 cents: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/2b9b75d1-eb8e-494a-b05f-59f75c92e6ae@marcan.st/T/#m1944b6d485070970e359bbc7baa71b04c86a30af
I'll put this into spoilers to reduce clutter for the others, it's a big wall of metadiscussion.
There’s no “two sides” here. I’m transparently saying that what I say should not be trusted, for those two reasons (1. not a programmer, 2. not in charge of this), and I’m still voicing my opinion on this matter, while focusing on other aspects of the discussion. Is this clear now?
Note: one of those two reasons likely apply to everyone else here.
If anything I could be blamed for the exact opposite - endorsing R4L. You don’t even need to read this comment to see it, the comment that you’re replying to is enough: “And if Hellwig cannot be convinced, the leadership can, and should.”
Learn the difference between “talking about what others said” and “endorsing what others said”.
Assumption: “not a programmer = unable to understand what’s going on”. I think that I showed well through this thread this is blatantly false.
Refer to the first paragraph.
It’s also relevant to note that, most likely, nobody here has the “kwalifikashuns” to discuss this topic. Not even programmers - because odds are that nobody here is in a position to change anything about it.
Okay… so far, so good.
*rolls eyes* assumption, again. Clearly assuming why I’m being dismissive towards you.
It has zero to do with me not wanting to be taken seriously. It’s because you show blatant lack of basic reading comprehension, while still saying this “I’m docking you” cringe. For example, vomiting an info dump that does not contradict a single shred of what I said (as if it contradicted), or with a hypothetical that is clearly irrelevant (“if it was a slur” - it is not, period).
Worth noting: nobody here has in a position to “dock lol” anyone else here.
Assumption…
Cool beans. And this does not contradict what I said, because contrariwise to what you are assuming = making shit up, I am not endorsing Hellwig’s view that Rust does not belong to the kernel, I am explaining his point of view while clearly saying “okay, Rust in the kernel seems fine, based on what people said here, but Martin is creating drama”.
I couldn’t be arsed to read the rest of the text. Other users are able to provide information about Rust here, so I’m not missing anything, minus the cringe and assumptions.
TL;DR: stop assuming.