Seems like he’s been pushed into using LLMs as a way to cope with the deluge of LLM-generated security reports.

  • binux@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Fair, but a little empathy for rsync users who only mean well would go a long way. The everyone-for-themselves mentality doesn’t tend to be very helpful most of the time, if ever.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Meaning well and blasting the rsync maintainer with absolutist anti-LLM messages are very different things.

      Th rsync maintainer is ironing out issues. Use an old version and let him cook. Once things are stable, then pull the new version. If you’re on arch or another unstable distro that always pulls the latest version, this is what you signed up for. Staying on the bleeding edge means you’ll bleed.

      It doesn’t excuse attacking he maintainer who seems to be making a genuine effort. That shows a lack of empathy.

      • binux@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Meaning well and blasting the rsync maintainer with absolutist anti-LLM messages are very different things.

        …Which is why I specified those who only mean well. Obviously that doesn’t include the less pleasant crowd.

      • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        We’re mixing up two things here. There’s valid criticism. And there’s the people who want to unleash some social-media style shitstorm. The latter show up in large groups and add some unsubstantiated comments, lots of emojis and drown any kind of conversation. But that doesn’t really take away from the valid criticism. For example a maintainer shouldn’t tag a version and release it, when it’s not ready to be released. That’s the 101 of software development. You can expect as much. Because the “bleeding” thing isn’t really how it works. Once there’s a new minor release tagged by the devs, it’s supposed to be picked up by the distro maintainers and get into any distro’s repositories. Doesn’t matter if it’s Arch unstable or Debian stable. They don’t want bugs and security vulnerabilities in their distro, either. Especially not when it’s 6(!) CVEs! And the Debian dev’s in fact reacted to this. And they even backported stuff to oldstable so the people who run the rock-stable stuff from 3 years ago get the patches! So it really doesn’t matter… Run a bleeding edge distro, or a stable one and don’t update it for 2 years, you’ll be affected by this both ways.