Re: Future automation possibilities

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 06:50:44PM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Just following up from a conversation Pierre and I were having on IRC about
> the potential for a revitalized automation tool. We talked about updating
> some of the jhalfs code-base to a more full-featured language like Python.
> I also mentioned investigating Go. I like that option because of the ease
> of producing tests with Go and it also lets us potentially create a static
> runtime binary with no external dependencies. (Zig would too, and I'm also
> investigating that as a possibility.)
> 

Having read lwn.net to look at what vulnerabilities the binary
distros are fixing, I'm exceedingly glad that go is not in blfs.
See e.g.
https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-14185/Golang.html

It looks like rust, in that when a vulnerability is made public the
binary distros have to update a shed-load of packages.

Never hear of Zig, a quick look at wikipedia implies it needs llvm
so it will be a heavy overhead to add for building LFS.

ĸen

[snip the rest, not my concern]

-- 
As a child I had a thing for dog chocolates, never did me any harm,
even at an old age I can still pee cleanly on a lamp post and hear
a postman approaching at 100 yards.

-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/alfs-discuss
Unsubscribe: See the above information page