Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

omgubuntu.co.uk

181–190 of 339 posts

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had to tell them repeatedly to stop copying tests verbatim, including the original comments from GNU coreutils. So I doubt this is true, which is frustrating.

What's wrong with them using the coreutils tests?

If they followed the license nothing. My uninformed knowledge is that the rust based rewrite is MIT, the originals are GPL, and you can't include GPL code in a MIT licensed project without making it GPL.

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#183
post #6

I really don't understand why Canonical rushes this. If 'rm' can't remove all possible directory entries, that is a big issue: $ podman run --rm -it ubuntu:26.10 $ apt update -y; apt upgrade -y $ rm --version rm (uutils coreutils) 0.10.0 $ gnumkdir -p $(yes a/ | head -n $((32 * 1024)) | tr -d '\n') $ rm -rf a Segmentation fault (core dumped) rm -rf a $ ls a a $ gnurm -rf a $ ls a ls: cannot access 'a': No such file o…

Rush? This is an interim release (95% or so only tracks LTS's) that is not even out yet... Go file a bug reports if you have some time.

This is certainly not just affecting interim releases. Ubuntu 26.04.1 has been released but is currently held back from do-release-upgrade for the LTS channel (which IIRC is unusual for a LTS's .1 release) due to rust-coreutils issue:

> Users of Ubuntu 24.04 LTS will be offered an automatic upgrade to 26.04.1 LTS via Update Manager a couple of weeks following this release after some planned backports to address regressions in a recent version of rust-coreutils.

https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-26-04-1-lts-released/8...

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#184

Whether you like Rust or not, it's questionable as to why Canonical would push this so much and do it in such a cavalier way. Will this really make coreutils more secure? I doubt it, if anything there will be a river of new bugs. So, again, why are they pushing Rust so much? Having Microsoft make Rust a 'Tier-1' language also doesn't bode well.

It removes a GPLv3 dependency that might stop some companies from adopting Ubuntu Core.

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#185
post #168

I would be very curious about a bit more concrete and substential criticism what is bad (or good) about how the both versions, that goes beyond general arguments like: Just because it is Rust, it is not safe! It worked before, don't replace it! etc. Not that these are not valid points of criticism, but in my opinion if we have two core utils we can (and should) pick the better one after careful continous evaluation.…

I think a lot of the actual issues they're encountering are that the underlying POSIX APIs have a lot of sharp edges which the older versions of the tools have had enough time to work around, while the newer ones are generally running into the same rakes that have been there for decades. It takes a fair amount of time for those to be found and dealt with (though it also takes use, so it's a bit chicken-and-egg).

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox installed as a snap feels sluggish to me. When I install a Ubuntu system, the first thing I do is to uninstall any snap and install the apt versions of things, possibly adding official PPAs or using Guix to install software.

why bother with ubuntu at all ? If you want ubuntu but without snap out of the box, Zorin is 1 option. Or if you also hate gnome, linux mint.

[deleted]

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#187
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason for existence of uutils is ideological, not technical. Thus code quality is of no use for the objective.

I’m a huge proponent of Rust and generally lean a lot closer to the RIIR mentality than most, but this effort seems to be such a waste of effort and resources. There have been a dozen CVEs reported against all of coreutils in the past twenty years. The most recent audit of uutils-coreutils turned up forty-four CVEs. By all appearances they’re replacing battle-tested and fundamental tooling which hasn’t been a problem…

I think this is more about the licence, the Rust rewrite just makes it easier to swallow/gain contributors.

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it, certain algorithms need guaranteed tail-call elimination, otherwise they are too inefficient and must be manually unrolled or rewritten to avoid blowing the stack. So a compiler optimization that is "nice to have" is not good enough.

No algorithm requires tail-call elimination in a general-purpose language with imperative mutability. It's just another way to express iteration.

Sure, but mutual recursion might require `goto` for example. Or an explicit state machine.

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#189
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have. It has been an open bug upstream for years as well.

ok, that's concerning, if you post it here I'll vote for it (after confirming).

The Launchpad bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rust-coreutils/+bu... .

The apparently related bug in the origin project is https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/issues/2949, filed back in 2022 and which sat unmoved for several years until, probably not coincidentally, almost the same time yesterday that this appeared on Hacker News.

Re: Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils

#190

I really don't understand why Canonical rushes this. If 'rm' can't remove all possible directory entries, that is a big issue: $ podman run --rm -it ubuntu:26.10 $ apt update -y; apt upgrade -y $ rm --version rm (uutils coreutils) 0.10.0 $ gnumkdir -p $(yes a/ | head -n $((32 * 1024)) | tr -d '\n') $ rm -rf a Segmentation fault (core dumped) rm -rf a $ ls a a $ gnurm -rf a $ ls a ls: cannot access 'a': No such file o…

I tried switching a buildroot based CI server to the 26.04

One Makefile statement triggered a bug in rust ln:

  src/%:
      @ln -sfn $(DIR)/foo src
In parallel build, we would get random failure:

  ln: Already exists
Rewrote that Makefile to work-around it, and ended up with the same kind of bugs with parallel $(INSTALL) -D ...

Tried latest ubuntu 26.10 which supposedly fixes a lot of TOCTOU races in rust coreutils, but no better.

Gave up and switched back to original coreutils.

Post reply on HN