This isn’t Linux, but Linux-like. Its a microkernel built from the rust programming language. Its still experimental, but I think it has great potential. It has a GUI desktop, but the compiler isn’t quite fully working yet.

Has anyone used this before? What was your experience with it?

Note: If this is inappropriate since this isn’t technically Linux, mods please take down.

  • mvirts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Slap a Firefox on top (and time travel to when ff is all rusted) and we’ll be coming for ChromeOS. But will windows be completely rusted first? 🙃

    • ChiefSinner@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think the main reason Firefox isn’t on there is because redox os doesn’t use Wayland and x11. Porting firefox would be a massive effort unfortunately.

  • guitarsarereal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m not against Rust, per se, the idea of a systems programming language with some more advanced memory safety features sounds nice, but what is with the emphasis on creating a Rust version of everything? Like why should we want an OS written only in Rust?

    • mogoh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Some thoughts:

      • Testing the capabilities of rust and proving what rust is capable of.
      • Seeing what rust is not capable of and proposing improvements for the rust language and ecosystem.
      • Trying new OS concepts. Linux for example is strongly backwards compatible. Starting a new OS is the opportunity to do things different and maybe better.
      • Maybe it will turn out, that the memory safety will improve OS’. We will only know for sure, if we try it.
    • redempt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I’ve been installing a lot of things written in rust recently, and I’ve noticed a trend between them. They’re all stable, fast, and very user-friendly. I don’t really have to fiddle with them nearly as much. I think there’s a lot that goes into this, but it really boils down to: rust is safer and prevents huge categories of bugs, it’s incredibly stable and requires less debugging and maintenance, it has extremely high level abstractions to make development quick and less verbose, and it has the best tooling I have seen for any language. It enables developers so effectictively that the things that are usually tedious and difficult become easy and potentially mandatory, and so you just get better software.

      I know that sounds pretty abstract and opinionated, but having used the language for several years now, and especially coming from Java, I have really felt an incredible difference - I stopped having to constantly fix breaking Gradle builds and JVM version management, I stopped getting null pointer exceptions, and I had much more powerful tools for building abstractions. When you see how much control and power rust gives you while still keeping you safe, it’s just night and day compared to the especially old languages like C.

      Basically, anything written in rust will be better if it can enable developers to spend their time working on useful features instead of fixing bugs, fiddling with build systems and fragile legacy infrastructure cobbled together from dozens of third party tools.

    • DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      This is one of my main gripes with the rust community. What programming language you used shouldn’t be of any concern to the end-user, let alone be put in the tagline.

      Rust is a very good and capable language and I enjoy using it. I can’t wait for the day it overtakes C or C++. But I want to know more about the program I’m using other than that it was written in a popular language.

      “Written in rust” is basically a meme at this point.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      People keep saying this but Rust is not only about memory safety. It’s not C with memory safety sprinkled on top. Compare with C and C++ it has better tooling and dependency management, it’s easier to create modules and organize your code, it’s easier to write tests and it has loads of nice, modern language features like algebraic types and typeclasses. Because of all this Rust is growing fast and a lot of people like it. Writing things in Rust is a bet that more people will get behind them and you will be able to add more features faster to them than to existing projects in C. The idea is not to simply do the same but in Rust. It is to have a cleaner, easier to approach codebase that will allow to grow faster in the future.

      • guitarsarereal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yeah, but I don’t know any other language where the fact a program is written in that language is used as a selling point. I never cared that Linux was written in C, I cared that it does its job. I’ve heard about Redox many times, yet never once has there ever been anything said about it other than “it’s written in Rust! :D” Literally, the fact that it’s a UNIXY operating system written in Rust is the first thing about the OS on their home page.

        Hey, Linux started as a learning project, you learn more about programming by writing code, so I’m not saying it’s bad, I just can’t understand why I’d care about something that at this stage seemingly is just a learning project.

    • jack@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The language is newer so it does a lot of things better than C, C++ and even higher level langs like java. It is more probable that people in the future build upon Rust than legacy languages.

      Comparable to how it would be misguided now to start a project that only runs on Xorg

      • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        But what is wrong with C and C++ apart from the ISO fuck-up (ahem, slow updates)? There’s a lot of technical debt, so wouldn’t it be better to create an alt-language compiler that adds improvement over C, so that migration is possible in multiple stages?

        Something like:

        1. Fix shitty imports
        2. Improve syntax rule
        3. Improve memory management
        4. Other new misc features
        • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Rust isn’t just a new improved version of C or C++. It’s completely new and it feels completely different to use Rust. In a positive way

        • callyral [he/they]@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          (notice: I am not a Rust or C/C++ expert)

          Doing all that is creating a completely separate programming language from C. Rust is that programming language.

          Fix shitty imports

          Rust does that with modules and crates.

          Improve syntax rule

          You mean having consistent/universal style guidelines? Rust pretty much has that with rustfmt.

          Improve memory management

          Safe Rust is memory safe (using things like the borrow checker), and Unsafe Rust is (usually?) separated using the unsafe keyword.

          Although Unsafe Rust seems to be quite a mess, idk haven’t tried it

          Other new misc features

          Rust has macros, iterators, lambdas, etc. C doesn’t have those. C++ probably has those but in a really weird C++ way.

          • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I should have framed my words better, I guess. Rust is a radically different language, and honestly, none of the feature it offers fixes the main issue, that is technical debt - I mean yes, there’s incline C or FFI, but that’s still going to be a radical migration.

            What I’m trying to propose is an alternative project, independent from the ISO. Maybe it could be a C-to-Rust, or a C-to-Vale migration project. It could be any of the modern language, I don’t really care. But that particular compiler/transpiler/migrationpiler/<something>-piler should have the ability to do step-by-step migration.

            • Spore@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I’d say no. Programming safely requires non-trivial transformation in code and a radical change in style, which afaik cannot be easily done automated.

              Do you think that there’s any chance to convert from this to this? It requires understanding of the algorithm and a thorough rewrite. Automated tools can only generate the former one because it must not change C’s crooked semantics.

    • weclaw@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      From my personal experience I can tell you 2 reasons. The first is that this is the first general purpose language that can be used for all projects. You can use it on the web browser with web assembly, it is good for backend and it also is low level enough to use it for OS development and embedded. Other languages are good only for some thing and really bad for others. The second reason is that it is designed around catching errors at compile time. The error handling and strict typing forces the developer to handle errors. I have to spend more time creating the program but considerably less time finding and fixing bugs.

      • LoETR9@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I feel like C++ is as competent as Rust for any project and it’s definitely older.

        • Wooki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Rust was created because c++ was so bad. Just take a look at crates they need a whole lot less maintenance because less bugs.

          • LoETR9@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            My point wasn’t that C++ is good. My point was that C++ can and is used everywhere (desktop applications, web applications, OSs,…) and is older than Rust. So I feel that “this is the first general purpose language that can be used for all projects” is false. Probably “this is the first general purpose language that I (and many others) like to use for all projects” is true, but is a different claim.

            TLDR: You said Rust was first language capable of system, app and web, it isn’t.

            • Wooki@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              It is good and rust improves on its gaping weaknesses.

              Yeah I never made that claim the threads OP did.

  • jack@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Now imagine the new COSMIC desktop environment in Rust on Redox, that would be great

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Why would that be great? It’s so weird that people care this much about what language their OS is written in…

      • jack@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I want the newest, best software. Is that uncommon? Modern rewrites are often much better than their age-old counterparts since the tech got better over time, compare for example grep vs ripgrep, or find vs fd. The rewrites are much faster and user-friendlier