Skip to content

Reddit will block the Internet Archive

Technology
156 101 1.6k
  • 55 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    M
    Pay no attention to the fabulous new watches and luxury car the judge starts to drive. A case that affects a broad range of people, such as this one, out be given sentencing by a broad range of people. Nor a single judge who likely has no technical knowledge or experience that would allow him the wisdom to know what the fuck he is doing and what the (non) consequence of his ruling mean.
  • Financial Efficiency Through Working Capital Management

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 652 Stimmen
    160 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    G
    I used Arch for about 7 years. I still have it installed on an old PC but I haven’t used it recently. Every time I told pacman to update everything it felt like an adventure. Never knew if I was going to reboot to a working desktop or to a console printing cryptic error messages that take a while to Google on my phone before I get things back up and running. I wouldn’t wish that experience on my worst enemy’s grandma! The only times I got this kind of problems where when I didn't read some announcement or for some reason some packages (the kernel) were way too old, normally never had it on a normal update. But as I said, you have a point, even if in the end I would point out that a grandma would never be able to solve any problem caused by an update, irregardless of the distro or the OS. It all comes down to the maintainers of Arch putting all of the responsibility for breakage (especially due to old configuration files) 100% on the user. That’s not a system any normal person should use, that’s a system for Linux hobbyists. Only partially. Normally Arch put the new configuration file as a [something].pacnew and it is the user that should then do something, but as long as the software that use the new file could undertand that it is using an older file and it is able to handle the eventually missing new keys or removed ones there will be no problem. On my desktop I have a bunch of [some_program].conf.pacnew and everything works. Is it optimal ? Maybe not but it is not broke. It’s fine if you want to assume all responsibility for updating grandma’s system and fixing breakage every time. I don’t have any interest in doing that. Honestly, a grandma would just need Firefox with a couple of extension (uBlock Origin and really few others) and a network with all inbound ports blocked (so no one can connect from outside) and few outbound ports open (very few, just the common ones to use a browser). Maybe she need Openoffice, probably a DE (but a window manager could be enough) but she don't need a lot of software we all install on out machine. It is true that Arch could be a problem when updating but I think we are talking of a very small set of packages that need to be constantly updated and in my years of Arch usage, basic packages rarely break something while updating.
  • 257 Stimmen
    45 Beiträge
    228 Aufrufe
    F
    So if you removed it for those reasons why did you reply with a different comment but without the link just after? Also are lefties still actually using “chud” and thinking it’s a zinger? Haha
  • 8 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    N
    downvoted to hell
  • Firefox 140 Brings Tab Unload, Custom Search & New ESR

    Technology technology
    41
    1
    234 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    605 Aufrufe
    S
    Read again. I quoted something along the lines of "just as much a development decision as a marketing one" and I said, it wasn't a development decision, so what's left? Firefox released just as frequently before, just that they didn’t increase the major version that often. This does not appear to be true. Why don't you take a look at the version history instead of some marketing blog post? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/releases/ Version 2 had 20 releases within 730 days, averaging one release every 36.5 days. Version 3 had 19 releases within 622 days, averaging 32.7 days per release. But these releases were unscheduled, so they were released when they were done. Now they are on a fixed 90-day schedule, no matter if anything worthwhile was complete or not, plus hotfix releases whenever they are necessary. That's not faster, but instead scheduled, and also they are incrementing the major version even if no major change was included. That's what the blog post was alluding to. In the before times, a major version number increase indicated major changes. Now it doesn't anymore, which means sysadmins still need to consider each release a major release, even if it doesn't contain major changes because it might contain them and the version name doesn't say anything about whether it does or not. It's nothing but a marketing change, moving from "version numbering means something" to "big number go up".
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 17 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet