Uutils 0.0.13 Released For GNU Coreutils Replacement In Rust

[phoronix]

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?page=news_item&px=Rust-uutils-0.0.13

[Quackdoc]

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

[ssokolow]

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.

[Draget]

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.

[NobodyXu]

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.

[Old Grouch]

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

[lumks]

One step closer to uutils/Linux

[dreich]

AFAIK coreutils are separate binaries.

You can configure coreutils with the

--enable-single-binary

switch which generates a single multi-call binary.

[Developer12]

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).

[Developer12]

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.