Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

HardSun · Yesterday 01:58:23

Because ubuntu's coreutils being rewritten in rust is totally working out!

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2 … 00285.html

Hi all,
I plan to introduce hard Rust dependencies and Rust code into
APT, no earlier than May 2026. This extends at first to the
Rust compiler and standard library, and the Sequoia ecosystem.
In particular, our code to parse .deb, .ar, .tar, and the
HTTP signature verification code would strongly benefit
from memory safe languages and a stronger approach to
unit testing.
If you maintain a port without a working Rust toolchain,
please ensure it has one within the next 6 months, or
sunset the port.
It's important for the project as whole to be able to
move forward and rely on modern tools and technologies
and not be held back by trying to shoehorn modern software
on retro computing devices.
Thank you for your understanding.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en

Last edited by HardSun (Yesterday 02:05:35)

golinux · Yesterday 02:12:52

@HardSun . . . you are just such a ray of sunshine . . . NOT. I am so sick and tired of the "we need modern tools and technologies" bullshit. Nothing good comes of it. It has been all downhill for decades . . .

Would be nice if you shared some good news . . .

HardSun · Yesterday 02:46:28

Good news is hard to come by these days, but i will try next time.
Im sure Julian would tell you this is great news however!

Last edited by HardSun (Yesterday 02:48:18)

Altoid · Yesterday 11:49:27

Hello:

debian developer wrote:

... and not be held back by trying to shoehorn modern software on retro computing devices.

Of course ... 8^°

--->

Tech *bros* have to make a living. 
Make ends meet, if you will.
Have you not been observing?
There are still many landfills to fill.

<---

Hard Sun wrote:

... would tell you this is great news ...

Yes, he would.

I take small confort in the fact that Civilisation (in general) has always had an incredibly over-abundant supply of [braindead / stupid / DHs / AHs]*.
That little snippet from the debian_dev only confirms it.

* choose one, a combination of two or even three. But a combination of four is not an option, lest depression set in.

Best,

A.

Last edited by Altoid (Yesterday 11:50:27)

tux_99 · Yesterday 12:54:56

Julian Andres Klode wrote:

rely on modern tools and technologies

Because "modernity" is all that matters to some folks these days... regardless whether "modern" is actually better or worse.

blackhole · Yesterday 13:18:44

debian developer
ubuntu core developer

And there it is...

So guess who is really forcing in rust?

HardSun · Yesterday 22:36:48

blackhole wrote:

So guess who is really forcing in rust?

Oxidization of Linux == converting everything to MIT or BSD licenses.
The corpos want ownership of the plantation, and they can't have that with GPL, so it has to go.
They've got Ubuntu. Is Debian on the same path?

zapper · Today 00:59:28

The only reason this could make sense is if they want to enable mediocre developers to make code that doesn't suck.

greenjeans · Today 01:23:03

It's important for the project as whole to be able to
move forward and rely on modern tools and technologies
and not be held back by trying to shoehorn modern software
on retro computing devices.

Translation: "OMG WTF is this 'end-of-10' bullshit? You peasants need to buy new computers and throw that old shit away, we know what's best for you and what's best for you is to spend 1000's of dollars you can't afford every couple years to buy new shit as is the will of your overlords!".

stargate-sg1-cheyenne-mtn · Today 03:44:38

reminded of this gentleman's functionable laptop:

https://imgur.com/gallery/functionable-wsDdXEN

or perhaps an old thread about old pc:

https://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,3216.0.html

also:

ewaste

blackhole · Today 08:39:26

HardSun wrote:

Oxidization of Linux == converting everything to MIT or BSD licenses.
The corpos want ownership of the plantation, and they can't have that with GPL, so it has to go.
They've got Ubuntu. Is Debian on the same path?

Actually they can and they have. You should refer to the licences of the Linux kernel and systemd in particilar, both corporate funded and managed projects.

By contrast, look at projects like OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD where there are donations, but zero or far less corporate reps steering things. All of those are permissive licenced. The main difference is that when e.g. Apple wanted to use code from any of those and include it in their OS, they just did that - they had no need to implant their own people, pay for things and take control - as the likes of MS, facebook, IBM, Microsoft, etc have done with the Linux Foundation.

Debian is the base system for Ubuntu, shares many of the same "developers" and maintainers, culture, etc.

Last edited by blackhole (Today 08:41:59)

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 Yesterday 01:58:23

Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#2 Yesterday 02:12:52

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#3 Yesterday 02:46:28

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#4 Yesterday 11:49:27

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#5 Yesterday 12:54:56

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#6 Yesterday 13:18:44

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#7 Yesterday 22:36:48

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#8 Today 00:59:28

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#9 Today 01:23:03

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#10 Today 03:44:38

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

#11 Today 08:39:26

Re: Hard Rust requirements for APT from may next year

Board footer