Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils • Hacker News Board

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#11

Post by gbersac » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:40 PM UTC

Is there a real need for this project ? I mean, this project has been used for a long time, could it really be better ? Do you intend to replace GNU coreutils ?

Not to be mean, just a genuine question (and yes I read the Why section of the readme).

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#12

Post by thegeomaster » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:40 PM UTC

ignoramous wrote: post #8

Rust is a great choice for systems programming it'd seem. Esp considering that a well-tested, battle-hardened code-base like SQLite faces problems [1] solely due to the nature of the language its written in. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11312918

Not sure why you're being downvoted. I don't see why we shouldn't be moving to languages like Rust given the chance, as C makes it far more difficult to write safe and correct code.

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#13

Post by mikerichards » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

jamescun wrote: post #3

Could be useful given the choice of MIT license rather than a GPL variant.

I guess this would matter to busy-box/router type applications.

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#14

Post by gjem97 » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #4

Rewriting coreutils is neat, but a project I'd really look forward would be a strict POSIX base expanded with warnings or errors on valid but risky constructs e.g. echo -n. Even more so if it included a shell (with static analysis of useless uses and dangerous patterns). That would make writing cross-shell scripts much easier.

Ok, I'll bite. What's wrong with "echo -n"?

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#15

Post by jkyle » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:42 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #4

Rewriting coreutils is neat, but a project I'd really look forward would be a strict POSIX base expanded with warnings or errors on valid but risky constructs e.g. echo -n. Even more so if it included a shell (with static analysis of useless uses and dangerous patterns). That would make writing cross-shell scripts much easier.

Alright, I'll bite...

Why is echo -n risky?

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#16

Post by wyldfire » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:43 PM UTC

gbersac wrote: post #11

Is there a real need for this project ? I mean, this project has been used for a long time, could it really be better ? Do you intend to replace GNU coreutils ? Not to be mean, just a genuine question (and yes I read the Why section of the readme).

How great would it be if coreutils could get replaced with this implementation? We've seen vulnerabilities come from here before.

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#17

Post by oldmanjay » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:44 PM UTC

gbersac wrote: post #11

Is there a real need for this project ? I mean, this project has been used for a long time, could it really be better ? Do you intend to replace GNU coreutils ? Not to be mean, just a genuine question (and yes I read the Why section of the readme).

Your last question seems reasonable, but the first is a classic tactic taken by that nerd subculture who loves to shit on things. This seems particularly true in light of your edit indicating you already know the answer.

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#18

Post by jrcii » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:45 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #4

Rewriting coreutils is neat, but a project I'd really look forward would be a strict POSIX base expanded with warnings or errors on valid but risky constructs e.g. echo -n. Even more so if it included a shell (with static analysis of useless uses and dangerous patterns). That would make writing cross-shell scripts much easier.

I'll bite

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#19

Post by z3phyr » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:47 PM UTC

Rust is a fine language, no doubt. What worries me is the exact rewrite of the C code using the unsafe construct.

Also a little out of topic; Can more light be shed by fellow HNers on the debugging tools for rust, the debugging experiences from the security research point of view?

Re: Cross-platform Rust rewrite of the GNU coreutils

#20

Post by amyjess » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 4:48 PM UTC

gbersac wrote: post #11

Is there a real need for this project ? I mean, this project has been used for a long time, could it really be better ? Do you intend to replace GNU coreutils ? Not to be mean, just a genuine question (and yes I read the Why section of the readme).

Honestly, I wouldn't mind a non-GNU alternative to their stuff that isn't either a) feature-bare like Busybox or b) tightly-coupled with other software like the BSD utilities.

Why non-GNU? To completely and thoroughly dispel the notion of "GNU/Linux".