News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust Dependencies Scare Me by crote on Friday May 09, 2025 @07:40PM (#43941956)
On the other hand, C/C++ makes it attractive to reinvent the wheel, or vendor the dependency instead. Rather than a single well-tested implementation in the ecosystem for something like sha256, you end up with every application having its own slightly-different, mostly untested, and essentially unmaintained version.

Applications still need the functionality. The need doesn't magically disappear when installing dependencies is a pain. If a crate has a bug, the entire ecosystem can trivially get the fixed version. If the Stackoverflow snippet a C app is vendoring has a bug, that fix is never getting in the app.

Re:Rust Dependencies Scare Me by uecker on Friday May 09, 2025 @10:36PM (#43942801)
That does not help you if the bug is one of many unmaintained crates and never noticed. Linux distributions aim to make sure that C application dynamically link to the right libraries instead of vendoring the code. Then the library can be updated once. IMHO this is the only reasonable approach.
Re:Rust Dependencies Scare Me by simonask on Saturday May 10, 2025 @03:06AM (#43943766)
It's trivial to see on crates.io whether a crate is unmaintained.
Re:Rust Dependencies Scare Me by uecker on Saturday May 10, 2025 @07:05AM (#43944734)
Maybe if it is completely unmaintained, but this is not enough to solve the problem and maybe also not really the point.
Re:Rust Dependencies Scare Me by shwouchk on Saturday May 10, 2025 @01:56PM (#43947555)
is it trivial to see if a third level dependency is unmaintained?