The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice

It's to keep the nohup command from sending nohup.out on stdout. Idk how agnostic (or safe) this solution is, but it works for me so, shrug.
AFAIK the nohup approach is one of the most robust and canonically UNIX solutions. systemd fucked with these subsystems for a while, but had to backtrack because of negative feedback.

abduco is a little more flexible, but works similarly underneath it all. The abduco/dvtm pair works as a great decomposition of tmux or screen.
 
Have any of you Linux Niggers™ tried using a Surface Pen on Linux? Is it generally good enough for my retarded Windows-having ass?

Asking because I have a Surface Pro that came with Windows 11, and I'm juuuuuuuust about fed up enough with 11 to jump ship.
I don't have surface, but I do have a HP 2-in-1 with a wacom integrated touch screen. I found that both Fedora and Ubuntu both support it well on install. I used r/SurfaceLinux for some hints & tips.

One issue is switching between keyboard input and the on-screen keyboard, especially when unlocking after suspend. My solution was to enable the Accessibility icon in the taskbar. I also had an issue with using the settings widget for pen calibration. It broke the input and made the input area 640x480 or so. The sensitivity settings work fine though.
I haven't yet been able to find a decent handwriting input solution (eg windows ink suite). All the software like Krita etc seem to work fine, Xournal++ is a must have, and Stylus labs Write app is pretty good.

On install, Kubuntu and Manjaro KDE didn't support screen rotation correctly, although I am sure it would work with some fiddling around. Another thing I tried with this tablet was installing ChromeOS which had great handwriting input support, if you are interested in swapping M$ spyware for Google's.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Pissmaster
How did that meme even get started? I remember first seeing it on 4chan about maybe a year or two ago. Obviously the guy in the photos isn't him, but what compels some autist to spam this shit on pretty much every e celeb thread on /g/?

Also because why not:

View attachment 3368454

View attachment 3368455
I suppose it came from /g/, as a way to spam/discourage e-celeb threads. It cracks me up every time :story:
 
What would you do if you saw someone else's computer with the "/g/ certified toaster" stickers in real life?
1593765152299.jpg1593790124440.jpg1606934434363.png1648763744757.jpg
 
So after much fidgeting with the idea of migrating to Linux, my failed attemp with an iBook G4, and the current state of Microsoft and Windows, I took the initiative and decided to install Mint 20.3 on an abandoned mini PC we had. It has an i3 4th gen clocked at 2.9Ghz and 4 gigs of ram. Even with the mechanical drive I installed into the machine, this fucker is going very well so far, it even detected one problematic printer we have right away! I am typing this through that very machine right now and I am going to turn this into my main computer, and if this goes smoothly for the rest of the month, I will try to convince my SO to start migrating the other PC's too.
 
I am going to turn this into my main computer, and if this goes smoothly for the rest of the month, I will try to convince my SO to start migrating the other PC's too.
Convince your SO to let you run them dual boot. That might help (I run dual boot as I’m convinced I will break it at some point).
 
I have a bunch of installation media stored as ISOs on my machine. I want to back them up but I also want to compress them to make better use of the limited space I have available.

I am compressing a single ISO as a test using
Code:
tar -cf /path/to/archive/archive.tar.gz -I 'gzip -9' /path/to/iso/

When the compression finishes I don't even have a 10% reduction in size (5781348 bytes original, 5769424 bytes compressed). Is this normal? Do ISOs just not compress very well? Is there a better way to do this that provides an actual reduction in size?
 
What are you compressing
I have a bunch of installation media stored as ISOs on my machine. I want to back them up but I also want to compress them to make better use of the limited space I have available.

I am compressing a single ISO as a test using
Code:
tar -cf /path/to/archive/archive.tar.gz -I 'gzip -9' /path/to/iso/

When the compression finishes I don't even have a 10% reduction in size (5781348 bytes original, 5769424 bytes compressed). Is this normal? Do ISOs just not compress very well? Is there a better way to do this that provides an actual reduction in size?
If the ISO you're compressing is an installation disc then it's almost certainly already compressed. Every Windows package and every Linux package is precompressed. You can try something like bzip2 or 7z, but they still probably won't do much.
 
What are you compressing

If the ISO you're compressing is an installation disc then it's almost certainly already compressed. Every Windows package and every Linux package is precompressed. You can try something like bzip2 or 7z, but they still probably won't do much.
They're games installers that I use with WINE. I guess they're compressed too?
 
When the compression finishes I don't even have a 10% reduction in size (5781348 bytes original, 5769424 bytes compressed). Is this normal? Do ISOs just not compress very well? Is there a better way to do this that provides an actual reduction in size?
If you're trying to minimize the size of the output tarball you can try bzip2 or xz instead (they sacrifice compress/uncompress time but in return typically give much smaller output sizes). But as @davids877 said the ISOs are pretty much already compressed to hell and back as it is. Especially the game installers (heck, part of any 'installation process' would just be decompressing the damn thing).
 
@Bat Dad @Pissmaster The one thing that does really frustrate me about using a '2 in 1' with Linux is that there's no way that I can figure out to run a LUKS encrypted drive, and unlock it without having a physical keyboard connected.

You would think this would be a more important feature for Plymouth graphical booting than say, displaying gay looking animations, but no, as always, Red Hat just shits out a shit solution to a problem that didn't really exist and shits along on its shit way.
 
Last edited:
So, after a month with zsh I can conclude that it's a pretty fun shell that makes file management a breeze and can be pretty powerful if set up enough for productivity.

What isn't great are the people relying on the slow, clunky, and more-than-anyone-ever-needs oh-my-zsh. This isn't great. It isn't even that good at all. It's a bad example of zsh I wish people just dropped, because there's tons of useful shell settings that aren't even exclusive to zsh that just make sense and don't require a lot of tweaks or background cruft. The few that don't use a glorified plugin manager file have some pretty nifty stuff that isn't reliant on OMZ whatsoever.

"oh-my-zsh" also sounds like the epitome of what happens when anything becomes popular.
 
Don't feel too bad, no modern Linux distro behaves properly on G4 iBooks, you were basically doomed before you even began. I've seen people have some success with recent versions of OpenBSD, but that's not surprising, it runs on anything and has an maintained PPC port.
Gentoo may be an option for a linux distro on PPC. or potentially Slackware
Edit: mixed up Slackware with Slackintosh, its an old fork but it does work alright afaik
 
Last edited:
Imagine being so obscenely brain dead that you need to watch a video to figure out wget.
I used to use videos like this as podcasts (audio only) to just casually absorb tool capabilities as I stepped into Linux and before actually using it as my OS of choice, they were good for that but I imagine that's an unusual way to digest them.
Videos like this attract a lot of pajeets who looked up a utility on youtube and then will comment "how do I do X" or "Can you show X?" even if X is irrelevant. RTFM just isn't a thing over there.
 
So, after a month with zsh I can conclude that it's a pretty fun shell that makes file management a breeze and can be pretty powerful if set up enough for productivity.

What isn't great are the people relying on the slow, clunky, and more-than-anyone-ever-needs oh-my-zsh. This isn't great. It isn't even that good at all. It's a bad example of zsh I wish people just dropped, because there's tons of useful shell settings that aren't even exclusive to zsh that just make sense and don't require a lot of tweaks or background cruft. The few that don't use a glorified plugin manager file have some pretty nifty stuff that isn't reliant on OMZ whatsoever.

"oh-my-zsh" also sounds like the epitome of what happens when anything becomes popular.
You will find that, on occasion, some bash scripts do not behave well if run in Zsh if run just using dot slash ( ./Foo). If you see errors when this happens, just call bash, bash Foo Not a question anyone asked, but a nice tip for those who have had an issue with some scripts. There a FireEye script, written in BASH, that really doesn't play well in Zsh.
 
Back