rustybox, an experimental fork written entirely in Rust
bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
Sat Nov 16 20:46:46 UTC 2019
On 14/11/2019 23:33, Markus Gothe wrote:
> How do you think that fatso library aptly named librust would fit into
> any modest embedded system? Well it doesn't and you never thought of
> that in the first place which makes the rest of your assumptions more
> damaging than any good.
> This doesn't solve a problem, it is like coding stuff in PERL; you think
> you're got a problem and then you try solving it using PERL/rust and now
> you've got 2 problems. Disgusting.
> Busybox is INTENDED for embedded systems (and without any explanation
"Embedded system" was never clear - actually really - defined and it got
worse in the last 20 years ...
> bounds-checking should be optional etcetera). Feel free to fork it and
> create a rust variant; but it is all out of the scope of the current
On the other hand, if all other custom applications are also written in
rust (or perl or ...), the relative size of the common lib divides
between them (assuming these are not really trivial programs).
Ot's similar to the question "do I link the/some libc statically into n
programs or do I keep it in a .so?".
Or (in other words): If I have librust.so (or libperl.so or ...) on the
device anyways (for whatever reason), does it pay off?
A completely other idea (and I'm know rust only from reading about it):
Perhaps the rust community can benefit from improving the "from-C"
converter or the compiler or whatever. Reducing the code size is also a
target for average software ...
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
More information about the busybox