At first I was sceptical, but after a few thought, I came to the solution that, if uutils can do the same stuff, is/stays actively maintained and more secure/safe (like memory bugs), this is a good change.

What are your thoughts abouth this?

  • 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    I fear moving away from GPL that moving to Rust seems to bring, but Rust does fix real memory issues.

    So you prefer closed-source code to potentially unsafe open-source code?

    Take the recent rsync vulnerabilities for example.

    Already fixed, in software that’s existed for years and is used by millions. But Oh no, memory issues, let’s rewrite that in <language of the month>! will surely result in a better outcome.

    • ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Already fixed, in software that’s existed for years and is used by millions. But Oh no, memory issues, let’s rewrite that in <language of the month>! will surely result in a better outcome.

      Rsync is great software, but the C language fates it to keep having memory issues in spite of its skilled developers.

      Preventing a bug from being possible > fixing a bug.

    • easily3667@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Rust isn’t language of the month unless you’ve been asleep for a decade, old man

      What about the rust version is closed source?

      This whole post is very disingenuous.

      Edit: oh you’re a troll