Version 0.5 of Redox OS was released yesterday, which includes a new C library written in Rust and images based on new bootloaders for both coreboot and EFI.
It's taken a while since the previous release of Redox OS as they have been focusing their attention on Relibc, a C library implementation written within the Rust programming language. Relibc is now used as the operating system's default C library.
Redox OS 0.5 also includes improvements to its event system, Pthreads support was completed, better support for LLVM and LLVM-using projects like Mesa/LLVMpipe, improvements to EFI, and more.
Some new Rust-written packages for Redox OS include OpenGL wrappers, an audio library, and other additions. Outside of the Rust scope, Redox OS 0.5 adds in SDL2 packages, Cairo, FFmpeg, and many other important software options.
You can find the Redox OS 0.5 release notes here, and can find the 0.5.0 images here.
Previously: Redox OS Exploring Coreboot Payload
Microkernel, Rust-Programmed Redox OS's Devs Slam Linux, Unix, GPL
Related Stories
There's a new operating system that wants to do away with the old mistakes and cruft in other operating systems. It's called Redox OS and is available on GitHub. It's aimed at creating an alternative OS that is able to run almost all Linux executables with only minimal modifications. It features a pure ecosystem using the Rust programming language which they hope will improve correctness and security over other OSes. They are not afraid to prioritize correctness over compatibility. The philosophy being that "Redox isn't afraid of dropping the bad parts of POSIX while preserving modest Linux API compatibility."
Redox levels harsh criticisms at other OSes, saying "...we will not replicate the mistakes made by others. This is probably the most important tenet of Redox. In the past, bad design choices were made by Linux, Unix, BSD, HURD, and so on. We all make mistakes, that's no secret, but there is no reason to repeat others' mistakes." Not stopping there, the Redox documentation contains blunt critiques of Plan 9, the GPL, and other mainstays.
Redox OS seems to be supported on the i386 and x86_64 platforms. The aims are microkernel design, implementation in Rust language, optional GUI — Orbital, newlib for C programs, MIT license, drivers in userspace, common Unix commands included, and plans for ZFS.
They want to do away with syscalls that stay around forever and drivers for hardware that, for a long time, simply isn't possible to buy any more. They also provide a codebase that doesn't require you to navigate around 25 million lines of code like Linux.
Perhaps the mathematically proven L4 microkernel is something to consider over the monolithic kernel approach where any single driver can wreck the system? One aspect to look out for is if they map the graphic cards into user space.
Redox OS (the Unix-like microkernel OS written in Rust) is working on a native Coreboot payload along with bug fixes and a new release.
Lead Redox OS developer Jeremy Soller tweeted that "it's time for Redox OS to become a Coreboot payload." It looks like Redox OS is working on native Coreboot payload support for this interesting Rust operating system rather than first needing to use one of the bootloaders as a Coreboot payload before hitting Redox OS.
[...] The Redox OS twitter also went on to outline they are working on fixes to their networking stack, fixes to curl / cargo / git, advancing towards the state of being able to self-host itself (build Redox OS on Redox OS), improving the relibc C library implementation, porting more applications to running on Redox OS, and at that point to also prepare a new release. And, yes, exploring Coreboot payload capabilities.
Previously: Microkernel, Rust-Programmed Redox OS's Devs Slam Linux, Unix, GPL
(Score: 3, Informative) by driverless on Tuesday March 26 2019, @10:25AM (10 children)
Original article -> Phoronix article -> redox-os.org -> Redox-OS documentation -> Redox book -> "What Redox is", where I finally find out WTF this thing actually is (a Posix microkernel written in Rust), and why I don't care about it.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @10:53AM (2 children)
It's not even planned to be POSIX compliant.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Tuesday March 26 2019, @11:03AM
Oh, this page [redox-os.org] says "We have modest compatibility with POSIX, allowing Redox to run many programs without porting", so I assumed there'd be Posix there.
If not then I'm even less interested in it.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday March 26 2019, @09:34PM
The hardware support is pretty limited too:
I would have thought USB keyboard and mouse support would be a something to prioritize, but then I have never written an operating system, so what would I know?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Apparition on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:03PM
It's the second article published on Redox OS in a month so I didn't want to be redundant or seem like I'm trying to draw the summary out. But, and forgive me as I know this may seem like a big stretch, you could scroll down to the bottom of the summary and see links to prior Soylent News stories on Redox OS, one of which is titled "Microkernel, Rust-Programmed Redox OS's Devs Slam Linux, Unix, GPL." "Microkernel," "Rust-programmed." Huh. Then, I know this part is shocking, you could click the link to the old article which gives a summary of Redox OS.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by engblom on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:37PM (2 children)
Whatever you think about Redox itself, I like the idea that someone has created a libc in Rust. This means that what they have created got the potential to be used by other OS. I think it is good to have an alternative with memory safety guaranties to "normal" libc (whatever it is gnu libc, musl or any other implementation).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:27AM (1 child)
And then you have to think about /bootstrapping/ rust on any other system. That shit is ridiculous. Even more ridiculous than package-management tightly couple with the language. Every time I see a project written in rust/go/whatever other bullshit they came up with to make packaging a pain in the ass, I close the damn page because it's just not worth it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:13PM
idk what the hell you're complaining about. You just install rust via your package manager and start using it. The crates are for building your apps with not necessarily for distributing end user software. When you write your app you can package the binary for whatever OS you want. What's the big fucking deal?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday March 26 2019, @05:06PM (1 child)
Are you saying the microkernel is a bad thing?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by engblom on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:00AM
No, I have nothing against microkernel. My answer was more of an answer to the parent post complaining about how he wasted his time checking out this project. I wanted to show him that there is a benefit of this project even if one would not like Redox OS itself.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:24AM
Read title=> it's an OS
Read TFS=> they rewrite core libs in rust
methinks it's a rust based OS.
(Score: 4, Informative) by tangomargarine on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:05PM (2 children)
and why we should care:
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 5, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday March 26 2019, @09:57PM (1 child)
I wondered, so I downloaded the live disc and booted into it on a Dell laptop I had available.
It is a 51 MB download so I was not expecting a lot, which is what I got. It runs reasonably well, but with no indication as to whether I have a network connection, or how to set one up.
It comes with a Browser, Terminal, File Manager, Editor, Calculator, Image Viewer, and a font viewer installed. The desktop environment looks a little like Mate maybe and is quite responsive.
Despite there being no USB HID driver according to the documentation my USB mouse works fine.
There's not a lot else to say, other than it boots, it runs, but I can't do anything useful with it.
I am sure the next release will begin to add the missing bits, but it's a long way from a v1.0 release.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:15PM
i wish they would focus on the firewall/server use case first.
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Tuesday March 26 2019, @11:17PM
That has to be one of the most passive-aggressive things I've ever seen. In response, I shall store a function pointer in a uint64_t and then cast it to a different function pointer with fewer arguments, then call it.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti