There's no reason not to. We'll just have to suffer through thousands more HN posts saying "new thing better, they should have used the new thing" whenever somebody finds a new kernel vulnerability.
It does nothing to help the situation. It's just complaining from people who won't be satisfied until all software is written entirely in rust. Why not contribute to the kernel and try to fix some bugs instead?
I believe there will always be some people cheering from the side, not directly contributing. But they're a useful barometer for the current weather. And for some time now we knew a change is coming. Who knows if the Rust kernel modules would've happened without so many people reminding us that we don't have to suffer from the same bug classes forever.
> It's just complaining from people who won't be satisfied until all software is written entirely in rust.
I don't care what memory safe language they choose, rust is just the obvious choice for this domain.
> Why not contribute to the kernel and try to fix some bugs instead?
Who says we don't? My company contributed a 0day to the Linux kernel just recently.
Maybe we're all saying "new thing better" because we're sick of people writing garbage software and making users unsafe? Maybe we actually know better than you?
If there's a significant improvement without critical downsides - I really hope they do. What's the reason not to?