skilltheamps

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (9 children)

That power efficiency is a direct result of the instructions. Namely smaller chips due to the reduced instructions set, in contrast to x86's (legacy bearing) complex instruction set.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I think I read somewhere that it just sends shift+super. So you may be able to bind it to whatever. At the same time its a dumb decision because now there's wasted space for a key combo you can easily press on a normal keyboard too

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

With something like this, how do you handle the period of time while copying? I mean you can't really leave it running as it wouldn't be in a consistent state. A "under maintenance" page instead? Copy to a fresh folder and when done tell the webserver to serve the new location?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"almost all of the most technical employees in framework are using either ubuntu, fedora or nixos. I'm mostly on Windows because we need actually people that are using Windows because our employee base in framework is all Linux users"

  • Nirav Patel

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EIEc43CxIvY

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (7 children)

That is not the case for every country though. In France and Germany for example almost 3/4 of google requests are via IPv6.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

If you have a working config, thats exactly the point. Before you built your config, you don't know. If you deploy silverblue, you know it will work beforehand because exactly this config, including /etc, has been tested upstream before. What you are to your buddy, Fedora Atomic is to me. The difference is, it is not just one person that tested some config they decided on on their single piece of hardware, it is the effort of a full blown distro team.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

No, just because it is reproducible doesn't mean you are able to (re)produce something that works. With something like fedora silverblue you know that this specific composition of packages and their versions has been tested, and that all the other users run this exact composition as well.

When you roll your own composition, where you install whatever stuff, you may be the one finding out that there's some conflict between package a version u.v.w and package b version x.y.z.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (11 children)

I encourage you to go to town with whatever crazy setup you come up.

I just want to note that the reboot-to-update mechanism also has its positive sides, as ancient as it may seem (we do not succumb to windows level backwardness, because that fails to reap the benefits despite requiring so many reboots). Namely, you get atomic updates, hence the name "fedora atomic" for example. That means you have no transient periods where your OS is running in an inconsistent state. Like when you update a traditional distro, the new files/libraries/binaries/kernel-modules do not match anymore what is in RAM, including the currently running kernel. That leads to stuff like the nvidia driver / cuda not working until reboot, running applications failing to load a library they need now etc.. The vast majority of times this is no huge problem, but in theory the only way of maintaining a system with it never running in basically undefined state is with atomic udpates.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago

And the firmware inside that rp2040 is stored on plain old flash memory. So while the data may still be on the memory chip, the controller chip dies at just the same pace than every other usb drive - and then you can't access it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

My Linux journey started when Ubuntu was in its single digit versions. I don't remember the exact version I used first, but it was >15 years ago.

Of course I had a long distro hopping phase, that got finally ended by Arch. Because Arch breaks less, at least if you don't molest it. Upgrades of versioned distros always had hickups or problems, and I grew tired of having to do a larger troubleshoot session once or twice a year. Arch has only very minor hiccups once in a while, and they're typically always the same. 99% when the update doesn't run through the keyring changed and you have to update it first, .9% is a bug with like a new release of the DE or something that gets fixed upstream in a couple days. And .1% is you have to look at the news because some manual intervention is required, like removing a package and going for something else or whatever. That is when you keep your system free of cruft and go with a popular DE.

Just 1.5 years ago I finally left Arch after a loong time. For something that is very new and different: fedora atomic (silverblue). Technology wise it is superior in my mind, and in my last years of using Arch I had most things in Flatpaks and containers anyways. But if you want a classical distro, Arch is definitely amongst the very well working ones.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

The more packages you install rpm-ostree, the likelier your system will break. You effectively turn back to a traditional distro that relies on a package manager, so all the things that can go wrong with a package manager are bound to go wrong. The whole point of fedora atomic is to offload the OS composition (so all the complicated packages stuff) higher up the chain. So that not everyone mixes up their own combination of packages installed, but instead you get a (semi-) fixed combination of packages that has been tested to work already before it lands on your computer.

The uBlue images are just different package combinations - but still you're not the only one rocking the packages combination of bazzite for example, so it is rather unlikely you'll run into a problem that only you and nobody else has.

This to me is also what sets fedora atomic apart from Suse MicroOS for example. With MicroOS you still have a package manager messing about with the system, and once it makes a mistake that gets buried in your system forever, except if you notice, roll back and fix it. As where with fedora atomic the mechanism how your system layout comes to your computer is similar to how git works (ostree) or images (like docker, which is what ublue ships). So if there's a mistake in how your system is layed out, the next time you rebase/update you are guaranteed to end up with a the intended system layout.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Hab ich mir auch mal gedacht, und habs bereut.

Ich vermute bei einer solchen Frage lebst du in einer Stadt, und nicht iwo auf dem Land mit Haus und Hof. Suche mal nach Rad-Waschboxen/-Waschanlagen in deiner Umgebung, so Zeug gibt's. Es gibt sogar Tankstellen die in den Waschboxen für Autos ausklappbare Fahrradständer haben. Und zur Not würd ich es einfach in ner Auto-Waschbox auf den Boden legen und fertig.

 

Hello,

I moved my home servers to fedora silverblue and docker-compose (ipv6 reasons :/). I stumpled upon the problem that I neither wanted to update image tags manually, nor have no idea what ":latest" deployed on my server in case I need to roll back.

To alleviate that problem, I made a small update-tool. It takes care of writing down the image@sha256... digest every time so that you can roll back. It also automatically snapshots and restarts the services.

It is made in Python but doesn't need any dependencies, so no catering for a venv either. You only need to have skopeo and snapper in working order. Maybe you'll find it useful, but please be aware that it is in an early stage. Also I'm not responsible if it nukes your server 😅

 

I often observe that people that started a small open source project seem to abandon it sooner or later. I'm guilty of this myself in numerous cases. Reasons there are many probably, from new obligations in life to shifts in interest and whatnot.

At some point somebody comes by with an issue, or a merge request even, but the maintainer does not take care of it. Usually this ends up in forks, often though forks undergo the same fate. Apart from the immediate forks-jungle, stuff like software stores or other things might be hardlinked to the original repo, which means places like these end up with dead originals and a number of forks with varying degree of being maintained as well.

To me its just a sad situation overall. And yet I cannot find the time or motivation to maintain some stuff, because circumstances just changed. And I also do not think one is obliged to do so, just because they where nice enough to share their code when the project mattered to them.

Is there a better way? Usually these are very nieche projects, and there is not a circle of regularly active developers that could share administration of a repo, but rather a quiet one-man-show with a short timespan of incredible activity. Some kind of sensible failover mechanism once the original maintainer vanishes would probably be cool. Or any other way that introduces some redundancy in keeping a repository alive. You know how package maintainers in Linux distributions open their package(s) for adoption by somebody else if they run out of capacity? I think that is nice.

I will publish a small project soon I think, but somewhere in the future I fear to leave one or the other person frustrated again when I have moved on to other things...

view more: next ›