On 9/2/18, Chris McGee <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm reading this article about how they are going through the giant heaping > pile of Linux kernel code and trying to come up with safer practices to > avoid the "dangers" of C. The prevailing wisdom appears to be that things > should eventually be rewritten in Rust some day. > Like hell they will! By the time they have even a minute portion of Linux running under a different language, the language-du-jour will have moved on. It's a monolith, it cannot be translated, unless it is mechanically. And we know how brilliant that is likely to be.
> How does everyone feel about the Plan 9/9front kernel? Have they gone > through hardening/testing exercises over the years? I'm curious what tools > are available to help discover bugs. > Simplicity is Plan 9's most relevant trait here, but that's where you draw the line. If anyone feels like finding possible security holes in the Plan 9 or the 9front kernels, they have to have very strong motivation to do it. In general that motivation is spelled M-O-N-E-Y and no one is likely to find the 9 flavours worthy of a big lump of that resource. My opinions, of course. Lucio.
