Happy to see more rust!
I’m geniously curious : Is there a difference in binary sizes? 5%? 10%?
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2025
41 points (95.6% liked)
Rust Programming
8839 readers
7 users here now
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Looks like it's split in library and binary, the binary itself is smaller, but if you add the size of the library it would be about 10% bigger. At least judging by the package sizes.
-
From https://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/r/rust-sudo-rs/
- sudo-rs_0.2.5-5ubuntu1_amd64.deb 2025-06-13 15:46 536K
- librust-sudo-rs-dev_0.2.5-5ubuntu1_amd64.deb 2025-06-13 15:46 580K
-
From http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/s/sudo/
- sudo_1.9.16p2-1ubuntu1_amd64.deb 2025-02-19 19:02 1.0M
Great, massive step forward. Rust’s memory safety will prevent potential PE vulnerabilities (and more).
Most user won’t notice.
No user should notice. If it acts differently then that's a regression.
It looks like it's explicitly not a 1:1 replacement
It is not a full replacement - but they are aiming for
Our current target is to build a drop-in replacement for all common use cases of sudo.
They are dropping support for some of the older/niche features/settings and now ignore some of the config you used to be able to do.
Some parts of the original sudo are explicitly not in scope. Sudo has a large and rich history and some of the features available in the original sudo implementation are largely unused or only available for legacy platforms. In order to determine which features make it we both consider whether the feature is relevant for modern systems, and whether it will receive at very least decent usage. Finally, of course, a feature should not compromise the safety of the whole program.
But generally for all common use cases it should just be a drop in replacement.
sudo-rs supports less functionality than sudo. Some of this is by design.
i.e. not 1:1 replacement.
My use cases probably won't be affected, but this will break things for some people.