Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

Post by roywiggins » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 11:11 PM UTC

logicprog wrote: post #30

gamegod wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the ultimate product for marketers. It inserts itself as an advertisement into every conversation now and defends itself against criticism. Just crazy. There's no hope for the rest of us.

It's not defending itself here, both because I used GLM 5.1, not Claude, and because I was the one who decided to do this analysis, iterated through six or seven different methodologies to try to find the one that was most honest with the data that I had (all of the methodologies showed directionally and often in magnitude the exact same thing, but I wanted to do something that fit the purpose, in consultation with m…

Post by delusional » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 11:14 PM UTC

zzyzxd wrote: post #123

thorum wrote: post #80

Unfortunately for the people mad about this, I predict the only thing they will accomplish by pressuring the rsync maintainers, is to discourage everyone else from responsibly disclosing their use of AI. You’re just going to make people disable Claude attribution on their commits to avoid drama.

I never care about AI usage disclosure, because I don't believe that human produced code is necessarily better than AI produced code, unless it's someone I personally know. People need to be responsible for code they commit and push anyways. This has never changed. Whether the code is written by hand, by their cat walking over keyboard, or by AI, is not my concern. A project's code quality can decline for all kinds o…

Post by School-Cotton » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 11:17 PM UTC

jhack wrote: post #237

eschaton wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Don’t get mad at people for doing something unethical or immoral, or they’ll do something unethical or immoral!” Disabling attribution of LLM-generated code is fraud, because you’re saying you wrote the code. Of course that fits right in with the use of an LLM to generate code in the first place, since what it’s actually doing is regurgitating its inputs stripped of any license and copyright notice.

"Disabling attribution of LLM-generated code is fraud, because you’re saying you wrote the code." Should there by attribution for Google or Stack Overflow copy/paste? Who should we bully about this?

Post by logicprog » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 11:20 PM UTC

wolletd wrote: post #246

GodelNumbering wrote: post #234

Was just looking at commits and came across a commit and its revert original commit: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/commit/d046525de39315d... ``` - if (!ptr) - ptr = malloc(num * size); - else if (ptr == do_calloc) + if (!ptr || ptr == do_calloc) ptr = calloc(num, size); ``` Written with claude. This is a good example of what slips through LLM attention. It forces all allocations to be calloc as if it is a str…

Also the amount of commits is suspicious. In the last two months, rsync had about as much commits as in the last two years before that. Most of them written with claude. And then stuff like this is in there. That's exactly what I'd expect when someone is excited about AI usage and becomes... well, sloppy.

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 11:22 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #187

ezst wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people prefer organic grown food for all kinds of reasons, does it matter to you they would want the same for code? (Also, I'm not picking a side here)

It matters when I'm contributing to their projects. In that case I'll go out of my way to be polite and learn their rules.