|
pram posted:no this guy is an actual idiot somebody buy this man an account
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
guys this web service just blows IPChicken.com out of the water
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
weird wsl use case #239 (that just happened to me): want to print on a weird network printer once, don't want to set up a windows driver for this one-off? well, fine, assuming it works with cups just print from wsl instead it is all a bit dirty-feeling, but the small conveniences line up, and get used a lot more if it is a shell away rather than some clunky vm
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
Bulgogi Hoagie posted:somebody buy this man an account so i think the answer to my question is "look busy"
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
carry on then posted:so i think the answer to my question is "look busy" in the middle of a large and fairly complex infrastructure modernization project, i once walked in on the "director of information systems" at a client, buffing laptops in his office that's not a euphemism, he was literally buffing laptops with a cloth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
the logo on that dudes website is something
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:the logo on that dudes website is something quote:By day, I’m a SR. Systems Engineer for a global media business headquartered in Southern California, serving on the front lines of Information Technology in 2017. My career, like a lot of IT Pros, started on the help desk way back in 1999.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
devours descartes
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
 scientia et labor
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
remember project courier? it's back, in pog form!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
apple: our software and devices work microsoft: check out this sweet hinge!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
microsoft surface 3ds
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
pram posted:microsoft surface 3ds
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:poor io (with vastly different characteristics for different ops, due to the mapping going on) but native for cpu/memory bandwidth/etc. pretty much how does this compare to the old POSIX subsystem? (I got a VT520 from someone who worked on that…)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:in the middle of a large and fairly complex infrastructure modernization project, i once walked in on the "director of information systems" at a client, buffing laptops in his office gotta make ‘em presentable
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
eschaton posted:how does this compare to the old POSIX subsystem? never used the posix subsystem so no idea how it panned out in practice, but the surface area of wsl is a lot thinner, in that it just defines a process type with linux-like syscalls, where i believe the posix subsystem had all its own runtime (e.g. some microsoft implementation of libc and all that vs. wsl just having whatever glibc and so on that the version of linux you pick ships with), so i expect that the posix layer was a lot more of a redheaded stepchild in all things including performance profile
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
the posix layer in nt existed to defraud the us government, not to do anything useful. it didn't even support network sockets and it couldn't interact with win32 processes in any way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:the posix layer in nt existed to defraud the us government, not to do anything useful. it didn't even support network sockets and it couldn't interact with win32 processes in any way. it's great how so many platforms that support "unix sockets" all have slight differences which make writing cross-platform code a pain in the rear end. non-blocking sockets being the big one. weird win32 socket return types being the close runner up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
microsoft making cross platform apis incompatible 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
I mean POSIX has never been about actually making different unixlikes compatible It's the poor man's open source version of being able to smack "unix certified" or whatever on your pos os
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I mean POSIX has never been about actually making different unixlikes compatible what’s great about this is that calling it the “open source version” will piss off stallman to no end, since he came up with the name POSIX
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:the posix layer in nt existed to defraud the us government, not to do anything useful. it didn't even support network sockets and it couldn't interact with win32 processes in any way. what’s the fraud? that they sold it as a feature for usgov or were mandated to implement it as some plea deal?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
Janitor Prime posted:what’s the fraud? that they sold it as a feature for usgov or were mandated to implement it as some plea deal? Wikipedia posted:This subsystem implements only the POSIX.1 standard — also known as IEEE Std 1003.1-1990 or ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 — primarily covering the kernel and C library programming interfaces which allowed a program written for other POSIX.1-compliant operating systems to be compiled and run under Windows NT. The Windows NT POSIX subsystem did not provide the interactive user environment parts of POSIX, originally standardized as POSIX.2. That is, Windows NT did not provide a POSIX shell nor any Unix commands like ls. The NT POSIX subsystem also did not provide any of the POSIX extensions that postdated the creation of Windows NT 3.1, such as those for POSIX Threads or POSIX IPC. Not exactly fraud, but definitely meeting the bare-minimum of compliance in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
there were two different posix subsystems. the first was the totally useless, almost fraudulent wrapper added to windows nt 3.5 the second was an outside acquisition: interix / sfu / sua. interix provided a full bsd unix environment and a gcc-compatible wrapper around msvc.exe. it was really fast but not real good on software compatibility, since it retained windows' weird binary formats and tools. from the perspective of ported software, it looked like a really weird 1980s unix they continued to ship interix / sfu / sua up until very recently. i know server 2012 originally came with sua, but it was removed. i assume to be replaced by wsl.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Grassy Knowles posted:Not exactly fraud, but definitely meeting the bare-minimum of compliance in bad faith. it would be impossible to port any actually-existing program. a base posix.1 api is enough to open files, read/write, and close them. and that's about it. posix.1 / fips 151-2 was only really useful to certify that a given unix wasn't too weird, it was not a complete programming environment in itself. edit: the fraud would not be insisting they are fips 151-2 compliant, because they were. the fraud would be allowing customers to believe they were comparable to other fips 151-2 products, which they definitely were not. the fips standard was limited by the availability of industry standards, which were in real bad shape circa 1990. so when a government customer asks for a fips 151-2 compliant package, they want a unix. any unix. on the assumption they can port their unix software to it. if they ended up with windows nt 3.1, everyone is going to Have a Bad Time. Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Dec 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:there were two different posix subsystems. the original POSIX subsystem also used Windows’ weird binary formats and tools, even though it was a peer layer above the NT kernel to the main Windows userspace so you still had to use MSVC to compile your POSIX.1-compliant code, and unlike the later stuff there was no CC/GCC-compatible wrapper
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ihateire/status/942479863457382406
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
This will disrupt the whole market and put Microsoft on top of the phone game... or, more likely, shitcanned in 2 years and officially declared dead via Twitter in 4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
 i'm the janky perspective
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Just-In-Timeberlake posted:
looks like a wallet blade to me
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Just-In-Timeberlake posted:
i'm the lazy as hell use of the fill tool
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
univbee posted:i'm the lazy as hell use of the fill tool mmmh that and second portion
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
don't even try to step to the 104
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:don't even try to step to the 104
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
FMguru posted:*steps to the 104* dun hosed up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REHTB1Lhmg4
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
my windows desktop can no longer stay asleep for more than a minute. powercfg is no help, I've disabled wake timers, and made sure my network card can't wake. hosed up
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
it's ur mouse. there's an hid driver that fixes that, that should have been installed automatically
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
assuming you've got one of those add-on wireless dongles, pull it and see if that keeps happening
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
my mouse both wakes up the computer from sleep for no reason, and refuses to be awake when the rest of the computer wakes up from sleep so i have to go into device manager and scan for hardware changes
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
powercfg -wakerequests will usually point you at the driver that is being lovely. I've seen audio stuff do that too
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 18:07
|
|
