@eric I'm on the fence on the topic. On one hand, the coreutils are venerable, proven, dependable, and solid, but on the other hand, every rust application I've touched (setting aside Conduit... which has... community driven problems...) has been very performant and robust as well. So I'm open to the idea, but just as a long road proves a good horse, time proves quality software.
@eric there are warts in the coreutils, I won't deny that. People like to meme on the implementation of `cat` in particular but there are others. Ubuntu has often been on the Betamax side of history in the past (Mir... Upstart... Unity... Snap...) so this may be another instance of that, but I'm willing to give it a chance. I'm not a daily Ubuntu driver so its more of a popcorn situation for me, but I can understand the apprehension too.
@prettygood the thing is i can't think of a single reason to justify this. gnu coreutils works fine and has already been proven by time whereas uutils is quite new. this is literally replacing something that works with something written in rust for the sake of replacing something that works with something written in rust imo.
@prettygood ofc because i just uninstalled arch to put kubuntu on my computer xd
and honestly the linux development (especially desktop) seems like a constant stream of new immature stuff replacing old mature stuff (systemd, pulseaudio and wayland most notably)
@eric funny you mention pulse in particular. Pulse is finally stable, reliable, and bug-free in my experience and now here comes the Pipewire crew trying to get that adopted. It never ends honestly.