|
mycophobia posted:gently caress it i installed gnome. whats the worst that could happen
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
i don't remember that happening, but it sounds bonkers
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 17:55
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:iirc it happened in a release candidate or beta, so it wasn't rolled out into production, but it was intentional, should have never happened, and had crazy people arguing that it was a good thing
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:don't care 2 shits about the systemd thing but that board is beautiful. Just look at those sick 1970's vector graphics fonts
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2021 11:48
|
|
|
Let's not kid ourselves, the commodification of compute and storage, both main and auxiliary, has absolutely caused developers to become less concerned with being memory efficient - browsers (and a lot of other things) use a lot of memory because systems have a lot of memory, and because they need to isolate everything. If there's one thing I wish people would learn from the past, it's the lessons of the UNIX wars - namely that there shouldn't be a very small number of people that gets to dictate how everyone should do it. Unfortunately, that's exactly how it is now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 11:39
|
|
|
mystes posted:Interesting take on the situation. I'm not convinced systemd really changes that much or is that significant philosophically though. However perhaps the people who are against it feel that it does/is.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 12:44
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:gently caress code size, asset size, whatever. memory is expendable but time isn't, so gently caress optimizing for size. optimize for speed. And the same goes for video games, they take longer and longer to load, than they ever have, and all they manage is to get closer to the uncanny valley. As for ARM, I think the instruction to optimise javascript means it might not be a RISC architecture anymore, no matter what it says on the tin. BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Oct 30, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
Poopernickel posted:The thing is, systemd isn't -one- thing. Poettering has said that he cares not one bit for portability or POSIX: Lennart Poettering in a 2011 interview at FOSDEM posted:In fact, the way I see things the Linux API has been taking the role of the POSIX API and Linux is the focal point of all Free Software development. Due to that I can only recommend developers to try to hack with only Linux in mind and experience the freedom and the opportunities this offers you. So, get yourself a copy of The Linux Programming Interface, ignore everything it says about POSIX compatibility and hack away your amazing Linux software. It's quite relieving! SYSV Fanfic posted:It's way more than that list now. Many of the LSB Daemons have systemd alternatives. That's essentially what systemd has become, a LSB init/daemon replacement. The ports collection is a hierarchy of Makefiles and (usually) a few patches that get applied at build-time, in order to fix Linuxisms. However, since it was introduced in 1994, the ports collection has not needed a whole lot of patches (with a few exceptions) because until fairly recently, most software developers don't exclusively develop software for Linux, they developed software against the POSIX standard or try for some level of portability. The exception being Chromium, where upstream has consistently refused patchesfrom FreeBSD (or the others, but that one is the one I know the most about), for everything from proper higher-privilege enforced sandboxing (instead of the weak sandboxing shipped in Chromium by default) down to a lot of very minor files. That last part is just plain wrong. FreeBSD is consistently in the top-5 for projects with the most up-to-date third-party software with a lower percentage of outdated third-party software then the rest of the top-10. Even then, it's not entirely accurate as there's a lot more ports than it lists and secondly because its way of calculating what's potentially vulnerable isn't very accurate and freebsd at least has its own much more accurate system that's integrated into the packaging system itself via pkg-audit(8) - and unless it's changed, most Linux distributions don't provide an option for doing that out-of-the-box. Meanwhile, there are still Linux developers who're interested in portability - NFS interoperability accounts for a pretty good chunk of fixes that's gone in to the head of the FreeBSD tree in the last few months, as a result of the maintainers of NFS on Linux and FreeBSD actually working on interoperability, which proves that it's still possible and there's still a will. So the question becomes: Does software benefit from portability, or is it not worth it? There are pretty definitive reasons for portability; at a very minimum it ensures that should your security needs require it you can run your software on multiple kernels (VeriSign does this for their root servers, by running both Linux and FreeBSD to ensure that they can't get targeted as easily), but in addition to that it also forces developers to think more about the code more, and discourages lazy developer practices which lead to mistakes. Put another way, it makes things more secure and it makes programs objectively better. If those reasons aren't enough for it to be "worth it", I don't know what is. BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Nov 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 13:27
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:oh also software float. this would be fine (ish) except for the entire “run JavaScript on everything” movement. did you know node.js supported software fp until like 2018?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 14:45
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:And at what point does the design complexity get complex enough that Buildroot goes bad? There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
 Mind you, BSD Makefiles contain conditionals, built-ins, more variable types, extensive modifiers, looping, and special attributes not found in other versions of make - but they're all documented in make(1). BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Nov 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
sb hermit posted:I like makefiles and I still make and use them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2021 19:29
|
|
|
eschaton posted:it’s really something to use, say, V7 and see just how spare it is compared to a modern BSD, even moreso to skim the code You know that little thing called stack sizes? Yeah, it didn't even have that. Stack sizes were introduced with 4BSD.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2021 14:33
|
|
|
sb hermit posted:No, and I'm not going to read an entire man page to find out. What makes you say that "reading an entire man page" makes it not worth it? As far as I'm concerned, they're a concise way of looking up something - ie. treating it as a reference work. And what's the alternative - GNU info? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2021 19:19
|
|
|
Wait, since when is any reference work "something you read from top to bottom" instead of quickly look through to find what you need? I wanted to demonstrate the things things that set BSD make apart, and the manual page lists all of them, that's all. Instead I'm apparently now Posting Enemy #1. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2021 20:20
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:i think the idea is that if you present something as comparatively unique you should itemize the things you feel are unique rather than say posting a link to the entire reference document for the tool and telling the people you're conversing with to figure it out themselves. BlankSystemDaemon posted:Mind you, BSD Makefiles contain conditionals, built-ins, more variable types, extensive modifiers, looping, and special attributes not found in other versions of make - but they're all documented in make(1). I can see why people might not link the two though, so I apologize for coming off as an asshat. mystes posted:do all posters with bsd-related names live in the 90s or something? The issue is, the code is influenced by bits dating that far back. Poopernickel posted:protip: you can search manpages by pressing / in man In the BSDs, (compressed) mdoc files are stored on-disk and are rendered by mandoc then displayed by the less(1) pager (by default, unless you set PAGER to something else or define LESS_IS_MORE to a non-zero value. Also, I just found out that less has --mouse, which is kinda cool. Besides, we all know emacs is a perfectly fine OS - it's just a shame about the lack of good editor.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:wierd that the linux tech tips guy cant run linux
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 14:14
|
|
|
i feel pretty vindicated in believing that despite having used freebsd for over two decades, i still can't recommend either freebsd or linux to someone who isn't a power-user with a lot of time on their hands also, i'm pretty sure i'm not the only one who equates linus not reading the warnings with the people who just press ok to every error that pops up on windows - which is not to blame linus or anyone who does it, but more to acknowledge that errors like that don't help if people just conclude that it's okay to accept them
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 14:50
|
|
|
Truga posted:good, keep the normies out of my system
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:The price of freedom, thank you very much. Cybernetic Vermin posted:there is very little on offer ever since like xp sp2 got windows to a state of decent security and stability.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 16:43
|
|
|
sb hermit posted:to be honest, if it isn't in my os repositories, then I'm much less likely to suggest it to others because janitoring is a pain and quality assurance isn't free. even if somehow magically you can avoid all the issues with proprietary nonsense, there's still a fundamental issue in that only a portion of any collection of games is gonna work, and there's a shitload of games that won't ever work on linux unless you use syscall emulation like wine or someone like the folks at GOG pick them up and do a lot of extra work on them - which doesn't seem to be the case at present, and even then they only have a small (but good) selection of older games, not every game ever made also, there's something more worrying going on, which i'm not sure i have a word for, but essentially comes down to me worrying that appealing to the masses is going to result in everything being made for the masses, with no attempt to make things for powerusers on the other hand, i get how elitist that sounds, and it's not something that keeps me awake - it's just a niggle
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
maybe all software just sucks 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
Share Bear posted:music/creative production? guess it depends on what you're trying to do, i imagine modular synth guys would love linux but no one else, or blender Tankakern posted:a torrent of bad linux takes day in and out
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
I feel ambivalent towards POSIX - it's one of the better examples of interoperability standards we have, but I cannot for the life of me imagine working on an OS that's strictly POSIX (ie. only implements what POSIX defines, and nothing else). That just sounds like a loving nightmare. SYSV Fanfic posted:Little known fact. Early on in the unix workstation game most offices had a bunch of dumb terminals that connected to a minicomputer. One of the selling points was that when you bought this $50k workstation, you could point all those text terminals at the workstation and give everyone in the office a big upgrade.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 15:35
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:Windows would suck pretty bad too if it started up as windows terminal server and you connected to an rdp session via loopback. On your single user desktop.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 16:26
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:I wasn't talking about the entire concept of multi user. I'm talking about configuring the machine by default for multiple users. There was a reason why NeXT got so much acclaim. Suffice it to say, there's a lot of rose-tinted glasses going around when it comes to NeXT and Steve Jobs. I know how teletypes communicated with minis - but I don't see how that affects the reality that multi-user environment still benefits Unix-likes to this day; if it wasn't a multi-user environment, there wouldn't be such a thing as dropping privileges and anything you might want to run on the machine (such as a web server) would run under the same user you're using.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 16:45
|
|
|
mystes posted:Actually nobody has to care about btrfs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:this is what i've never understood about brtfs and zfs etc, why not use an actual cluster filesystem like idk ceph or something at that point, a single massive multi-block-device filesystem managed by a single os instance seems rather fragile and bottleneck-y. BTRFS may look a lot like ZFS (including having lots of Oracle copyrights all over the codebase, lol), but I wouldn't trust it with my data - and neither does Facebook.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
eschaton posted:it’d be hilarious to watch the Linux crowd try to actually pass the conformance suite without the ability to “well, ackshually…” anything eschaton posted:none of the people I know who were there have anything good to say about that book I think I phrased myself poorly, my entire point was that not everything a modern user runs runs as their own user; before Firefox on FreeBSD got OSSv4 compatibility re-added (because Mozilla quietly broke and removed it), pulseaudio would run as the pulse user by default, and on the off-chance that I ever install a httpd on my laptop, it's configured to use the www user by default (and there's an entire list which maps processes to UIDs). On top of that, with ACLs you get just about as much granularity as you could possibly want. matti posted:i am reading uh
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2021 11:52
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:it occurs to me that the POSIX utilities specification has a standard ISO C compiler frontend specified but no assembler or linker
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2021 12:18
|
|
|
fresh_cheese posted:POSIX was such a lowest common denominator spec of what a UNIX implementation had to provide that IBM was able to build a POSIX compliant ( and UNIX branded maybe??? ) abi into MVS - os/390 - z/OS So clearly POSIX wasn't everything to everyone, even then.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2021 15:34
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:Probed via linus's tip. Makes that guy close to laport I guess. Contrast this with the IRIX seating functionality, whereby multiple people can work on the same program from multiple different sets of monitor+keyboard+mouse connected to the same session - I recall seeing a demo video of 4 people working on different parts of the same 3D object at one point. A similar thing got added to XFree86 and is still in Xorg to this day, called multiseating - but outside of a demo I did of it using FreeBSD at a LAN more than a decade ago, I've never actually seen it in use.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2021 02:34
|
|
|
sb hermit posted:That actually sounds kinda cool and would be a kickass way to collaborate. But I can see how complicated the programming can get. pseudorandom name posted:why would you put that in the display system instead making the individual programs client-server, since you're going to have to do that for all of them anyway
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2021 04:00
|
|
|
Tangentially related to that, the reason X got its name is because it was one better than the W windowing system on an operating system called V. Someone made a port of X for the i386, and called it X386. Then someone else made a free implementation called XFree86.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2021 04:40
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:oh you're talking about MDI with multiple pointers and cursors
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2021 04:51
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:y2k caught us by surprise, y2k38 is a pain to fix, but by god we will be prepared for y292g I have a vague memory of talking with people in around 1997 or 1998 who were preparing for it, and they weren't the only ones. As far as I remember, the reason there weren't bigger problems back then is that so many companies had prepared for it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
simh is cool as heck, but even if i know how impossible an expectation it is, i wish it was it was cycle-accurate
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
software: possibly subject to change.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
lol at using magic numbers in the year 2021 when they've been an anti-pattern since when fortran was new
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:who needs magic numbers when we've already discovered the ultimate data format: json. Nomnom Cookie posted:endian? why would i want to do that, i've never even met ian 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 20:56
|
|