Re: Future automation possibilities
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lfs.automated |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CANytiYwKOvcbWnf4Ci-xxRu9Znqw3XgELVHyobXJ7hYWsp=WMQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:40 PM Ken Moffat < [email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > Many of those are low, and most of the ones I'm seeing in the list are for older versions of Go. Also, I'm not sure I understand what is scarier about that than e.g., Glibc? https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-72/product_id-767/GNU-Glibc.html > 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. > If you wanted to compile it yourself, sure, you would need the respective compiler. But if you just wanted to use it to get started, you could use a pre-compiled one without adding anything to the system. Still, you already have Python in the book and it is probably an easier language for others to contribute to, so it's probably a more natural fit. JH -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/sympa/info/alfs-discuss Unsubscribe: See the above information page