Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Uutils 0.0.13 Released For GNU Coreutils Replacement In Rust

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Uutils 0.0.13 Released For GNU Coreutils Replacement In Rust

    Phoronix: Uutils 0.0.13 Released For GNU Coreutils Replacement In Rust

    Coming together over the past year has been uutils as a Rust-based Coreutils implementation to replace the long-used GNU Components. Since last year Uutils has been good enough to yield a working Debian Linux system at least for the basics while out this weekend is a new version of uutils...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-uutils-0.0.13

  • #2
    I wonder the preformance difference is between uutils and redox core utils.

    Comment


    • #3
      Probably not favourable for uutils. From what I remember, it began as more of a programming exercise (meaning it wouldn't have started with a lot of the performance optimizations coreutils has) and I'd imagine they're probably mostly focused on getting the test suites passing.

      Comment


      • #4
        uutils follow the same single-binary approach that calls a different function depending on the name it was called by.

        This is more similar to projects like busybox or toybox than coreutils, or? AFAIK coreutils are separate binaries.

        Still a cool project.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Draget View Post
          uutils follow the same single-binary approach that calls a different function depending on the name it was called by.

          This is more similar to projects like busybox or toybox than coreutils, or? AFAIK coreutils are separate binaries.

          Still a cool project.
          This is actually a good thing compared to GNU utils implementation.

          Many utils commands are fairly simple and contains a lot of common code, like argument parsing, some text transformations, etc.
          Using multi-call can reduce duplicate binary code stored on disk.

          Also, rust have a statically linked standard library, using multi-call library can further reduce the storage requirement.

          Comment


          • #6
            It might be important to some that GNU coreutils is GPLv3 licensed, but uutils is MIT licenced.

            Comment


            • #7
              One step closer to uutils/Linux

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Draget View Post
                AFAIK coreutils are separate binaries.
                You can configure coreutils with the
                Code:
                --enable-single-binary
                switch which generates a single multi-call binary.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Old Grouch View Post
                  It might be important to some that GNU coreutils is GPLv3 licensed, but uutils is MIT licenced.
                  Many people, including the contributors don't care. Many see the MIT licence as being a Freer alternative. Some small number just don't want any GNU on their linux system (eg. by using Alpine).
                  Last edited by Developer12; 03 April 2022, 11:22 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
                    Probably not favourable for uutils. From what I remember, it began as more of a programming exercise (meaning it wouldn't have started with a lot of the performance optimizations coreutils has) and I'd imagine they're probably mostly focused on getting the test suites passing.
                    Linux began as a programming exercise.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X