The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
BMO_ said:
Yes! My distrohopping quest is finally over!
Includes Cinnamon 6.0 with experimental support for Wayland.
Click to expand...
Should have used this one.
linux.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Vecr, teriyakiburns and Doctor Neo Cortex
BMO_ said:
> 2.2
doesn't support amd64
edit: also made by Ian so homosexual.
Click to expand...
Discs cut for Terry Davis's architecture will run on these new-fangled 'amd64' machines too, what the problem is? Potato worked fine when installed floppy disc by floppy disc on my 486.

Let me know when the feds consider you important enough to murder you like they did Ian Murdock.
 
Last edited:
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Miller and Doctor Neo Cortex
I've decided to install Plasma 6 RC1 on my Arch install since KDE's announcement. The GUI improvement are well appreciated, I can use my finger on the lockscreen, the new sounds are nice, though since it's beta software there's a few issues that buggers me:
  • Konsole always shows SSH and shortcut windows, even if I disable them in the settings;
  • Plasma doesn't properly shows the logoff screen (disabling it bypasses the problem);
  • Custom date display doesn't respect the system's language;
You can easily install it by following these simple instructions:
wiki.archlinux.org said:
This repository contains the latest beta or Release Candidate of KDE Plasma and Applications.

To enable it, add the following lines to /etc/pacman.conf:

/etc/pacman.conf
Code: 
[kde-unstable]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

The kde-unstable entry should be first in the list of repositories (i.e., above the core-testing entry).

Make sure you make bug reports if you find any problems.
Click to expand...
Make sure to create a Timeshift backup before switching to Plasma 6, especially if you tried to install Plasma 6 Beta (which had broken settings menus).
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Solid Hyrax, Miller, Doctor Neo Cortex and 1 other person
Ahriman said:
I am nowhere near a Linux/Unix historian to fully grasp the diferences between init and SystemD but judging by what I've read so far -and to bring up a somewhat apt analogy- this is like people discussing the Ford Flathead V8 against the 5.2L Voodoo. As in, some things need to move on and improve with time.

Rolling Linux like it's still the '70s can't be good in the long term.
Click to expand...
Why do you fucking people keep pretending that the alternatives people are asking for are still old shit like SysVinit? There are plenty of relatively new init systems including but not limited to the ones Artix Linux provides (OpenRC, Runit, S6 and particularly Dinit) which all do a much better and simpler job than systemdicks does.
 
  • Agree
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Informative
Reactions: Bagger 293, Fabio Socialist, ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ and 12 others
Ahriman said:
I am nowhere near a Linux/Unix historian to fully grasp the diferences between init and SystemD but judging by what I've read so far -and to bring up a somewhat apt analogy- this is like people discussing the Ford Flathead V8 against the 5.2L Voodoo. As in, some things need to move on and improve with time.

Rolling Linux like it's still the '70s can't be good in the long term.
Click to expand...
"While admitting to not know enough on the subject, I still feel the compulsive need to share my uninformed opinion through a contrived and nonsensical analogy with the rest of the world."
 
  • Like
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛, Doctor Neo Cortex, WTBOnlineFather and 3 others
The spazzing out about init systems is a complete mystery to me because of how much of a non-issue it actually is. How often do people have to set up or change things about their init and assorted scripts? Even busybox' init is good enough. I know because I use it. Not because it's the best init ever and covers every edge case there ever is, but because it's good enough for me. I swear to god, most people that freak out about this very topic probably have never touched anything in an inittab or an /etc/init.d/* in their lives and have probably no idea whatsoever how few programs and little you actually need to do to bring a usable Linux system up. *If* you're are a professional overlooking a gazillion of various systems that really need coverage of edge-cases and difficult and varying configurations you *surely* have some mostly agnostic automation going on that doesn't make you rely on the whims of some single init-system behemoth project with all it's moving targets and changing config syntaxes, because you know *exactly* what you're doing and what you want to do. Right? Right?? Also don't give me the line that you're so busy and important that you literally can't spare the time to learn how to AUTOEXEC.BAT linux, if you have time to discuss this topic at length online, you have time to learn this. Ignorance isn't cool.

I was traveling the last few weeks and connected to my home network and desktop via wireguard. Streaming games was mostly out as the internet connection in the locations was usually ass but I liked the general experience. If you've so far favored OpenVPN but like simplicity and performance, give wireguard a try. I haven't consciously avoided it, it was more like that OpenVPN just worked for me and I didn't feel the need to screw with that entire topic. It has a lot of that simple flexibility that drew me to Linux in the first place and you can do quite a few cool things with it as a building block. I for example use it in combination with hardware TPMs to unlock/decrypt my hard disks remotely during booting. It's a lot simpler than what I had going on before.

I always told myself I'll never need a NAS (never was the data hoarding kind of guy) but I feel AI is gonna make a lot of online content unreliable in the coming years so I bought a bunch of various manufacturers' 18-20TB harddrives (it's amazing how cheap spinning rust is now, and these drives are neither slow nor loud, I've seen *a lot* worse) and this snug case and will be building a small but nice one with an ancient but ECC supporting AMD board. As a linux native, my filesystem of choice is of course gonna be butterfs. I'll download loads of crap!
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: The Ghost of Kviv, WinRAR Free Trial, Jeff Q. Anime and 5 others
AmpleApricots said:
The spazzing out about init systems is a complete mystery to me because of how much of a non-issue it actually is.
Click to expand...
It's not a non-issue, though. systemd has created a gigantic potential attack surface by tying a bunch of userspace components into a common library and intermingling the code of daemons that shouldn't have dependencies on one another. It is a direct attempt by red hat and poettering to control the direction of linux development, by creating a series of (often hard) dependencies on and between elements of the system that were previously agnostic. Sperging over inits is one thing (upstart my beloved, why were you abandoned), but getting antsy about how systemd has infiltrated so many formerly independent systems is another thing entirely. The problem is that systemd is not an init; it's a "system management daemon" that happens to contain a (poorly performant, masssively over-engineered) init "module". If it were just an init, there would not be so much angst.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Antithesmith, Nitro!, ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ and 8 others
teriyakiburns said:
It's not a non-issue, though. systemd has created a gigantic potential attack surface by tying a bunch of userspace components into a common library and intermingling the code of daemons that should have dependencies on one another. It is a direct attempt by red hat and poettering to control the direction of linux development, by creating a series of (often hard) dependencies on and between elements of the system that were previously agnostic. Sperging over inits is one thing (upstart my beloved, why were you abandoned), but getting antsy about how systemd has infiltrated so many formerly independent systems another thing entirely. The problem is that systemd is not an init; it's a "system management daemon" that happens to contain a (poorly performant, masssively over-engineered) init "module". If it were just an init, there would not be so much angst.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a made up, "just so" story.
 
  • Disagree
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Computer Guardian, 419, Doctor Neo Cortex and 3 others
Betonhaus said:
I had forgotten about some distros requiring a paid subscription for update management. That's a big no-no in my books
Click to expand...
This is new, saw it for the first time today and I've been using this shit distro for at least 3 years. If I understand correctly the paypigs are given special hardened versions of packages required by some glowie fed security standards and a 5 year LTS extension, but anyway that is beside the point here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doctor Neo Cortex
teriyakiburns said:
It is a direct attempt by red hat and poettering to control the direction of linux development, by creating a series of (often hard) dependencies on and between elements of the system that were previously agnostic.
Click to expand...

No, they did not create systemd just to be control freaks because control is just fun (and he had no way to force any other distro to use it). Init is a critical part of an OS, and since it's not part of the kernel, there is technically no standard Linux init. Things like device management and inter-process communication are important, and having a common standard makes developing & deploying software and training an IT department easier. Aside from any technical pissmatches about why SysV is crap or whatever, the most important thing systemd does is unify a whole bunch of things nobody wants to have to actually care about so you can support the Linux distros 90%+ of machines actually have with that much less fuss.

teriyakiburns said:
If it were just an init, there would not be so much angst.
Click to expand...

The angst over systemd is a very loud, very tiny minority being extremely unpleasant online and in user groups. The entire enterprise world uses RHEL & SLES derivatives. Most of the Top 500 machines, which have extreme performance demands, use it. The lunatics at Cray use it. The vast majority of desktop users use it.

teriyakiburns said:
(upstart my beloved, why were you abandoned)
Click to expand...

Because nobody values it. Scott Remnant went to Google to make buckets of money and nobody in the entire GPL community had any interest in picking up Upstart. That's the thing about FOSS software - if people actually want something, nobody's stopping anybody from picking it up. And that probably explains why systemd has conquered the world. The reality is system init is as boring as fuck, and you really only have two kinds of FOSS developers. You have the guys who collect checks from corporations to ensure what they produce meets their backers' needs, and you have paste-eating nerds who work on things because it's their passion. Nobody's passionate about init, but corporations are paying people to make sure systemd is maintained and continuously developed, so it's ending up as the default as one distro after another adopts it.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
  • Dumb
Reactions: ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛, std::string, 419 and 5 others
DrNow said:
Is there a case to be made for the CD rom?
Click to expand...
For Linux installation? I dunno, USB sticks mostly work just as well, although you may still encounter an installer where bits and pieces of it expect only a literal CD-ROM. Or you know, more likely a DVD-ROM these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back