Skip to content

Comment on Bringing Memory Safety to sudo and suparent

Comments

The point GP was (probably) trying to make is that OpenBSD's vision of security is at odds with its insistence on C, a notoriously unsafe and insecure language. There's no reason that the replacement language has to be Rust; it could be Nim or Zig or C# or Java or Vala or OpenBSD Custom Memory-Safe Language.

What it takes for OpenBSD to choose to support whichever language it wants to is primarily a commitment to actually spend its resources to support said language. That the OpenBSD targets for Rust are tier 3 is a sign of its unwillingness to consider moving away from C: what it takes to move from tier 3 to tier 2 is a set of maintainers who have a commitment to be responsive to patches, and an automated CI solution.

(Also note that OpenBSD is the largest Unix "stuck" in tier 3 for Rust. Solaris/Illumos, FreeBSD, and NetBSD all manage to have tier 2 builders. Even Fuchsia and Redox have tier 2 support!)

I think sometimes people forget the openbsd project was not started with a text editor opening an empty file.

OpenBSD's vision of security is at odds with its insistence on C,

Their idea of security honestly seems very narrowly scoped on fixing a particular set of issues.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.