Rust-Written Coreutils Replacement uutils 0.0.19 Released

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Rust-Written Coreutils Replacement uutils 0.0.19 Released

The open-source uutils project that is striving to be a drop-in replacement to GNU Coreutils but written within the Rust programming language is out today with a new feature update...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/uutils-0.0.19-Rust-Coreutils

[Sethox]

On the surface it's a hobby project with some personal reasoning, but depending on how one research the source code (to rewrite it on another language) could prove good to analyze better solutions to the minor details.

Only when it's stable and good to go will the end-user see if it was worth it or not.

[ZeroPointEnergy]

I have some serious reservations when it comes to this rust projects. On one side, it's nice that rust has language features that makes the programs more secure. On the other hand, it basically pull down 80 dependencies which makes it more vulnerable to supply chain attacks. I'm not convinced that is a win.

[Sethox]

I have some serious reservations when it comes to this rust projects. On one side, it's nice that rust has language features that makes the programs more secure. On the other hand, it basically pull down 80 dependencies which makes it more vulnerable to supply chain attacks. I'm not convinced that is a win.

Yeah, hopefully this issue will be solved by the time Rust is "taken seriously" (becomes mainstream), it is a big issue otherwise.

[NobodyXu]

On the other hand, it basically pull down 80 dependencies which makes it more vulnerable to supply chain attacks. I'm not convinced that is a win.

If you don't pull these dependencies down, then you would have to implement homebrew versions of them for your crate, which could be worse than existing solutions.

[darkonix]

I have some serious reservations when it comes to this rust projects. On one side, it's nice that rust has language features that makes the programs more secure. On the other hand, it basically pull down 80 dependencies which makes it more vulnerable to supply chain attacks. I'm not convinced that is a win.

I have seen this argument before. Most modern languages have established default package systems unlike C. I'm curious about what would be the proposed alternative to have external dependencies. In tree copy? Reimplement them every time?

[Nth_man]

> The open-source uutils project that is striving to be a drop-in replacement to GNU Coreutils

Big companies are using Rust as an excuse to replace licenses like GPL with licenses they can get away with when they decide to [take advantage of the work of other people without giving back, even using their work to leverage closed-source competing products and prevail].
-- https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...post1385196

[bug77]

I have some serious reservations when it comes to this rust projects. On one side, it's nice that rust has language features that makes the programs more secure. On the other hand, it basically pull down 80 dependencies which makes it more vulnerable to supply chain attacks. I'm not convinced that is a win.

You don't have to pull any dependencies, you can always write and use your own code. It all comes down to whether you trust your own skills more than code that's out there, in the open.
Also, it's not like you pull those dependencies directly in prod. You can (and should) always audit the resulting binaries.

[Vaporeon]

If you re-implement something proprietary and release it under a free license, people bother a lot about making sure the project is clean-room (see WINE).
If you re-implement a GNU project and release it under the permissive MIT license, washing it of copyleft protections, no one seems to question the legalities of that.

[EphemeralEft]

If you re-implement something proprietary and release it under a free license, people bother a lot about making sure the project is clean-room (see WINE).
If you re-implement a GNU project and release it under the permissive MIT license, washing it of copyleft protections, no one seems to question the legalities of that.

Copyright holders of proprietary software usually have a lot more money and motivation to try and kill competition, whereas open source software is often just backed by individuals or small non-profits which run on donations.