What is the lack of a Rust equivalent to all those projects is because they already exist and work well, and Rust programmers aren't as mad to rewrite things as the stereotype suggests?

I disagree that they work well. A quick search of the CVE database will find many vulnerabilities that could have been prevented by rewriting in a memory safe language. Ideally, it should be done. However, rewriting those large projects would be a very difficult task, so it's probably not the best use of resources when there are still relatively easy security improvements available, such as implementing OpenBSD's pledge/unveil system.

Oversimplifying, there are two metrics: Bugs, and features. You're pointing out that the existing ones have bugs, parent comment is pointing out that the existing ones have features. Rewrites tend to have less of both.

> so it's probably not the best use of resources

Cool, so what useful software are rust programmers writing with all that free time? Where is it?

Where's the "killer app"? Whatever it is, nobody is talking about it.

There’s millions of lines of production Rust at tons of companies. It’s beyond one single killer app. Basically every major tech company relies on at least some Rust at this point.