Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] Introduce Rust and announce that it will become mandatorty

>> We know for sure that NonStop currently does not support Rust at
>> all, and that there are problems with porting Rust to Gentoo, but
>> I'd like to hear what OSes and Architectures you use personally and
>> professionally and why adding Rust would be a bad idea. Is it
>> corporate policy? Is it that the Rust toolchain doesn't exist for
>> your os/arch? Is it that Rust is a new language and isn't as battle
>> tested as C? Something else?
>
> There is no problem with supporting rust on Gentoo. Gentoo users build
> from source, and rust is a problem for anyone who builds from
> source. I'm writing this on a riscv/musl system. If there are no
> binaries for your CPU/libc, let me tell you, it's not fun. And this is
> like, my job. A normal person would be completely helpless.
>

> Nevertheless, the arch support issues are secondary. I'm sure it's a
> lot of fun for the people who are writing rust code to do cargo
> updates in the two or three directories they work in all day. But I'm
> not writing rust code, don't care what language git is written in, and
> have hundreds of other packages to keep up-to-date on multiple
> machines. I want to be able to use my package manager to do that
> efficiently. You know, the main tangible benefit of using a linux
> distribution.
>
> But every distribution is "packaging" rust the same way. They're
> bundling random old versions of crates in violation of their own
> policies because the ecosystem is unstable and the tooling encourages
> tight coupling. By requiring rust, you are require me to go back to
> managing dependencies like I'm on Windows XP again. Git is the most
> important program I use, but it's not more important than package
> management itself.