4 ms·
What's wrong with it as long as it comes from a https URL with low potential for typo squatting (a short .sh domain would be even more natural but maybe controv
by tannhaeuser 4y ago
What's wrong with it as long as it comes from a https URL with low potential for typo squatting (a short .sh domain would be even more natural but maybe controversial and a bit expensive for just this)? You don't have to pipe it into sh, you can also redirect it ie "> install.sh" then examine it before running. What's the alternative? A dozen incompatible centralized lang-specific or distro-specific package managers? Might work for devs but not end users, might not work with all licenses, is extra work for distros + Mac OS so chances are the O/S you're using or would otherwise be using isn't covered, ...
- ilyt 4y agoUninstallation issues. I'd rather have package that tracks what files it installs and removes cleanly.
- moondev 4y agohttps://rust-lang.github.io/rustup/installation/other.html https://rust-lang.github.io/rustup/installation/other.html The whole point of this installation method is ease of use. You can use it for convenience if you prefer it. I don't see the issue with providing more options not less.
- steveklabnik 4y ago`rustup uninstall` will cleanly uninstall everything.
- dheera 4y agoTry examining the above script. It's a lot of work. It's not just a bunch of wget's and cp's, there are a bunch of subroutines and conditionals. Too much to look at. Also as another user pointed out, uninstallation is a problem.
- scubbo 4y ago> Try examining the above script. It's a lot of work. It's not just a bunch of wget's and cp's, there are a bunch of subroutines and conditionals. Too much to look at. This would be a reasonable counter-argument if most people could honestly claim to have inspected the source of >1% of the things they'd installed from apt-get/yum/etc. "But I trust the maintainers of those repositories to verify correctness" - yes, and people trust the Rust maintainers, too. I'll grant you that uninstallation is usually a good argument (though not in this particular case).