cargo-crev
compiler-team
cargo-crev | compiler-team | |
---|---|---|
55 | 46 | |
2,034 | 380 | |
1.7% | 1.8% | |
7.7 | 6.8 | |
27 days ago | 14 days ago | |
Rust | HTML | |
Apache License 2.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
cargo-crev
-
Hard disk LEDs and noisy machines
In other cases it may be more documented, such as Golangs baked-in telemetry.
There should be better ways to check these problems. The best I have found so far is Crev https://github.com/crev-dev/crev/. It's most used implementation is Cargo-crev https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev, but hopefully it will become more required to use these types of tools. Certainty and metrics about how many eyes have been on a particular script, and what expertise they have would be a huge win for software.
-
Rust Without Crates.io
The main problem the author is talking about is actually about version updates, which in Maven as well as crates.io is up to each lib's author, and is not curated in any way.
There's no technical solution to that, really. Do you think Nexus Firewall can pick up every exploit, or even most? How confident of that are you, and what data do you have to back that up? I don't have any myself, but would not be surprised at all if "hackers" can easily work around their scanning.
However, I don't have a better approach than using scanning tools like Nexus, or as the author proposes, use a curated library repository like Debian is doing (which hopefully gets enough eyeballs to remain secure) or the https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev project (manually reviewed code) also mentioned. It's interesting that they mention C/C++ just rely on distros providing dynamic libs instead which means you don't even control your dependencies versions, some distro does (how reliable is the distro?)... I wonder if that could work for other languages or if it's just as painful as it looks in the C world.
-
I don't care about cookies” extension bought by Avast, users jump ship
For instance, the worst company imaginable may be in charge of software that was once FOSS, and they may change absolutely nothing about it, so it should be fine. However, if a small update is added that does something bad, you should know about it immediately.
The solution seems to be much more clearly in the realm of things like crev: https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev/
Wherein users can get a clear picture of what dependencies are used in the full chain, and how they have been independently reviewed for security and privacy. That's the real solution for the future. A quick score that is available upon display everytime you upgrade, with large warnings for anything above a certain threshold.
-
I think there should be some type of crates vertification especially the popular ones?
The metrics on crates.io are a useful sniff test, but ultimately you need to review things yourself, or trust some contributors and reviewers. Some projects, like cargo crev or cargo vet can help with the process.
-
[Discussion] What crates would you like to see?
You can use cargo-geiger or cargo-crev to check for whether people you trusted (e.g. u/jonhoo ) trust this crate.
-
Pip and cargo are not the same
There is a similar idea being explored with https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev - you trust a reviewer who reviews crates for trustworthiness, as well as other reviewers.
- greater supply chain attack risk due to large dependency trees?
-
Why so many basic features are not part of the standard library?
[cargo-crev](https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev) looks like a good step in the right direction but not really commonly used.
-
“You meant to install ripgrep”
'cargo crev' makes this kind of workflow possible: https://github.com/crev-dev/cargo-crev
-
Difference between cargo-vet and cargo-crev?
The crev folks themselves are no fans of PGP but need a way to security identify that you are in fact the review author, so that's where the id generation comes in. Ultimately crev is just a bunch of repos with text files you sign with IDs. The nice property is that you can chain these together into a web of trust and it's unfortunate that vet doesn't just use the same signed files on repos model as a foundation because even if they don't trust anyone else, we could turn around and trust them.
compiler-team
-
The Rust Calling Convention We Deserve
> Also, why aren't we size-sorting fields already?
We are for struct/enum fields. https://camlorn.net/posts/April%202017/rust-struct-field-reo...
There's even an unstable flag to help catch incorrect assumptions about struct layout. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/457
- Rust proposal for ABI for higher-level languages
-
The Linux Kernel Prepares for Rust 1.77 Upgrade
Are you talking about https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688 ? I think that issue provides a lot of interesting context for this specific improvement.
-
Progress toward a GCC-based Rust compiler
And mips64, which rustc recently dumped support for after their attempt to extort funding/resources from Loongson failed:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/648
This is the biggest problem with the LLVM mentality: they use architecture support as a means to extract support (i.e. salaried dev positions) from hardware companies.
GNU may have annoyingly-higher standards for merging changes, but once it's in there and supported they will keep it for the long haul.
-
Cargo has never frustrated me like npm or pip has. Does Cargo ever get frustrating? Does anyone ever find themselves in dependency hell?
See https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/688
- Rust: Drop MIPS to Tier 3
-
There is now a proposal to switch Rustc Nightly to use a parallel frontend
The work has been going on for some time now and it seems we are quite close to it being enabled as a default for nightly builds, I am super thrilled upwards of 20% faster clean builds and possibly more are on the horizon. Hope everything works out without triggering some unseen ICE. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/681 Edit: If you want to discuss this feature reach out on Zulip
-
Rust 1.72.0
I'd recommend reading the MCP[1] they linked regarding the decision as well as their target tier policy [2].
They are dropping tier 1 support for Win 7 and Win 8. That means they are no longer going to guarantee that the project builds on those platforms and passes all tests via CI.
As long as it is feasible they will probably keep CI runs for those platforms and if interested parties step up and provide sufficient maintenance support, it will remain tier 2. i.e a guarantee that it builds on those platforms via CI but not necessarily that all features are supported and guaranteed via passing tests.
If interested parties can provide sufficient maintenance that all tests continue passing, it will be tier 1 in all but name. However the rest of the development community won't waste their time with issues like Win 7 and 8's partial support for UTF-8.
And once CI stops being feasible for the compiler team to host, it'll drop down to tier 3. If there's sufficient interest from the community towards maintaining these targets, in practice you should see comparable support to with tiers 1 or 2 however now any CI will be managed externally by the community and the compiler team will stop worrying about changes that could break compilation on those targets.
TLDR: They aren't saying "it'll no longer work" but rather "if you want it to stay maintained for these targets, you have to pitch in dev hours to maintain it and eventually support the infrastructure to do this because we don't see a reason to continue doing this". So if you care for these targets, you'll have to contribute to keep it maintained.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/651
- Experimental feature gate for `extern "crabi"` ABI
-
Prerequisites for a Windows XP 3D game engine
(The already broken) XP support was removed almost 3 years ago: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/378
What are some alternatives?
crates.io - The Rust package registry
libvfio-user - framework for emulating devices in userspace
stackage - Stable Haskell package sets: vetted consistent packages from Hackage
llvm-mos - Port of LLVM to the MOS 6502 and related processors
crates.io-index - Registry index for crates.io
ua-parser-js - UAParser.js - Free & open-source JavaScript library to detect user's Browser, Engine, OS, CPU, and Device type/model. Runs either in browser (client-side) or node.js (server-side).
serde - Serialization framework for Rust
namespacing-rfc - RFC for Packages as Optional Namespaces
cargo-msrv - 🦀 Find the minimum supported Rust version (MSRV) for your project
cargo-show-asm - cargo subcommand showing the assembly, LLVM-IR and MIR generated for Rust code
Rustup - The Rust toolchain installer
libgccjit-patches - Patches awaiting review for libgccjit