What’s wrong with having a some year old software? Does it do what you need? Yes. Then what? I have all I need on Debian. Why should I care of new updates. Security? Yes we have Debian security because of that. Look, y’all had the xyz backdoor package in your systems because it was new. Me as a Debian stable user I didn’t have to deal with it. Did I lose something by not having the latests software? No. Well maybe less crashes.
Most privative software also gets weekly updates. Does it make it better? No. You may prefer that.
Also I don’t get the point about the version numbering of Debian packages. Every team uses the versioning they want.
From my experience software that updates a lot tends to break old features a lot too.
Debian suporting freesoftware projects or other stuff doesn’t look as a relevant argument. I mean if you prefer using privative stuff and using that kind of software. Do whatever you like with your Google/Facebook/Apple friends.
But don’t come intoxicate the community with this bullshit.
I have a friend who works for a local, but widespread bank, and got to head up their digital security and IT stuff. Not sure what all it encompasses, but he quickly found out that it was a lot, and the previous guy quit because he had had enough bullshit.
Long story shorter, after a particularly bad week, he decided to just… Stop doing his job.
Kept all their legal stuff and sensitive info under lock and key, but the smaller stuff, he just let it go. Went on vacation, turned everything off, didn’t do everything for a temporary replacement (which isn’t even his job, it’s hr’s) and spent a week playing video games and spending time with his wife and baby.
Several employees just in his building basically ended up doing nothing by the end of the first day because they had locked themselves out of the system.
By day 3 there were several lines that couldn’t be used by the tellers in every branch, older employees were bricking their systems so fast, construction workers started taking notes.
By the end of the week they had people showing up at his door to try and contact him since nobody could get ahold of him. Some legit thought he was dead.
His first words when he got into the office on Monday, we’re “THAT is why you pay me.”
And after that, he was given 3 people to help out (he had been asking for 4) and they had a company come in and redo a lot of the computer systems that year.
Still works for the bank, still has a team although I think they’re bigger now since they’ve opened a few more branches, and still tells that story at every gathering after his one single beer gets him tipsy.
Is it just me, or do programmers only come in “lightweight” and “Rivals Þor in trying to drink the oceans dry” varieties?
Is it just me, or do programmers only come in “lightweight” and “Rivals Þor in trying to drink the oceans dry” varieties?
Somehow I manage to be both. My alcohol tolerance is very high (which is great… I like a little buzz but never want to be actually drunk), but for me, one toke is over the line.
The “what do we even pay you for?” is just like with projects:
“why isn’t this finished yet?”
We have to add tests and make sure we’ve tried to cover our bases.
“that’s not necessary, if it works now, just release it” That’s not-
“I don’t care, I pay the bills”
Sure thing boss. a few weeks later “This thing doesn’t work”
Yeah, it’s what we wanted to test.
“Well why didn’t you?”
😐
Man Nvidia users are going to be stoked when the get explicit sync in they’re desktop environments in two years. 😂 They’re have been so many small improvements in the Nvidia drivers up until that point I hope they actually update Nvidia drivers on Debian. I understand some of those improvements are not going to work because of the kernel version and the desktop versions.
I’m using mxlinux “ahs” version, it comes with kde at their “ahs” repos for supporting latest hardware and graphics cards. You may also check for the non-ahs, there might be a meta-package for kde plasma and that’s it…
'The wind keeps blowing my wifi signal away ' is more than enough information to diagnose the problem, and 'the computer forgot my password' is now a real thing since password managers started coming baked into browsers.
We are so far beyond parody of ourselves that i have no idea how the onion stays in business.
How could you be simpler than keepass? Like, there’s more advanced features, but for basic function, its just a password to access a list of passwords.
…its just a password to access a list of passwords.
Unless you never thought of, implemented, regularly did and regularly tested your backup of the database. Or… try to use it on more than one device - maybe even at the same time.
That’s the main problem with KeePass. It’s nice to have it offline, fully under your control and out of the cloud, but that comes with some responsibilities on your end. And now think of how the average user solves this. If you’re tech savvy enough, KeePass is great!
You technically only need it on one device if you don’t want to be able to copy/paste or use the autotype feature. Which works fine until you lose or break that one device or upgrade to a new one and forgot you needed to transfer your passwords or delete your database because you didn’t remember what it was and wanted to free up space.
And Bitwarden has scary things like “self-hosting”.
Setup syncthing between the computers. If the person is not tech savy enough, they can always force the tech savy enough person they know to set it up for them. The are no problems with the tech, people just dont know it exists. Even if you don’t or can’t use syncthing (iOS users), you can just be stupid and put it in the cloud.
Honestly, I’ve worked with a few teams that use conventional commits, some even enforcing it through CI, and I don’t think I’ve ever thought “damn, I’m glad we’re doing this”. Granted, all the teams I’ve been on were working on user facing products with rolling release where main always = prod, and there was zero need for auto-generating changelogs, or analyzing the git history in any way. In my experience, trying to roughly follow 1 feature / change per PR and then just squash-merging PRs to main is really just … totally fine, if that’s what you’re doing.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that while conv commits are neat and all, the overhead really isn’t really always worth it. If you’re developing an SDK or OSS package and you need changelogs, sure. Other than that, really, what’s the point?
Any standard that wastes valuable space in the first line of the commit is a hard sell. I don’t see the point in including fix/feat/feat! just for the sake of “easy” semantic versioning because generally you know if the next release is going to be major or minor and patches are generally only only after specific bugs. Scanning the commits like this also puts way too much trust in people writing good commit messages which nobody ever seems to do.
Also, I fucking hate standards that use generic names like this. It’s like they’re declaring themselves the correct choice. Like “git flow”.
You can always adapt to your how repo. But yeah, that’s the point. If you can trust people to make changes on a repo then you should be able to trust them in using some kind of commit structure.
Generic names are probably used in order to crate a familiar, easy to remember, structurized commit format.
Cisco as a client tried to force ipv6 for their managed service and after an entire quarter of attempting to resolve it, we actually disabled it for their virtual address per their request. IPv4 has issues and IPv6 promises solutions, but it’s not a stable platform yet. This appears ignorant but is based on truth. IPv6 is also eventually going to hit exhaustion with the frequency we spin up virtual machines, it’s okay to skip a bad generation.
I’m sorry but how? We have appliances with dockerfiles, micro containers for remote controls, extensive botnets of virtual machines, centuries in the future when we have expanded into the solar system and trillions of humans all having millions of unique applications with addresses, it’s inevitable to hit a finite number. When every square meter of smart road has an routable address; we will likely be rewriting networking anyways. The only players pushing IPv6 transition are networking companies because a new standard requires new hardware.
IPv6 has a total of 3.4E+38 addresses, and the entire surface area of the earth is 5.1E+14m². If we divide those two, then we find that you can have 6.7E+23 addresses for every square meter of your Saharan desert or Pacific Ocean smart roads. If civilization doesn’t collapse due to nuclear wars or climate catastrophes and we actually do make it to the stars, I doubt that we would still be using the centuries-old and deprecated internet protocol.
IPv4, in contrast, has 4.5 billion addresses, and there are currently 8 billion humans on Earth. While not every of them lives in the parts of the world with internet, that number will most likely soon shrink to nearly nothing. When everyone and their dog has a smartphone, laptop, desktop, console, smart TV et cetera, that 4.5 billion doesn’t seem nearly as big as it first once seemed to be.
This isn’t a Y2K-scale problem that will summon armageddon if we don’t solve it immediately, but our current solutions to the overflowing IPv4 addresses are well-polished hacks at best. IPv6 will ensure end-to-end connectivity for many years to come.
So, yes a few pieces of land mass tech such as smart road or solar paneling and we hit the theoretical limit of IPv6. And we currently dont need the addresses. So glad that you agree
Virtualization was supposed to reduce the overhead, not create entire DevOps departments.
Years of containerization yet no real use over make clean; make build
Wanted to deploy your app in the “cloud” anyways for a laugh? We had a tool for it, it’s called rsync
Let’s run a virtual container in –privileged mode, so we can manage system resources from it – Statements dreamt up by utterly Deranged
Look at what tech interviews have been demanding your Respect for all these years. (These are real documentation examples for how a simple virtualization supposedly works)
I am a little biased because I’ve been using Debian professionally for many years now but we don’t deserve Debian. It is fantastically stable and reliable and makes an excellent platform for running your services off of. If you are at all interested in offering some time and energy to the open source community, consider adopting a Debian package!
but seriously, modern FOSS distros (yes, debian is modern, damnit!) are amazingly good. you have an exceptionally high probablility of switching and staying switched.
Side note: anyone got recommendations for business software? I’ve started browsing the FOSS community here for ideas but I’m not sure what QuickBooks alternatives exist
A quick Google shows Quickbooks to be cloud-based accounting software. For FOSS accounting, GnuCash exists so you could try that (it can also run on Windows and macOS). However, it’s unlikely to have feature parity so if you like the added convenience that Quickbooks offers, see if you can use Quickbooks in a browser. Being cloud-based, they would probably build a browser version before building a Linux desktop app. If they don’t and you need to run a Windows desktop app on Linux, you can probably do this using Bottles (which uses Wine and Proton under the hood, the tech that enables the Steam Deck).
I mean yeah, but specifically I’d like something built for Linux that’s good for just basic spreadsheet stuff. I’m an electrician so I mostly just need to track jobs and accounts.
Most of (what we call) Linux OSes are formally GNU/Linux. GnuCash is as close as it gets to “made for Linux”. If you don’t want an accounting-specific application, but just generic spreadsheets, check out LibreOffice.
I highly recommend GnuCash for accounting though: a fellow board member cleaned up an org’s accounting by putting it all in GnuCash, where it was a bunch of error-prone Excel sheets before. That really made it easier to keep track and to do it right.
The best accounting software will be the one your accountant uses.
When clients are on the same platform that I use internally everything just matches up and it’s beautiful and elegant and amazing.
When clients are using something else it just doesn’t fit our workflows and it’s just more of a fuck around, which of course the client gets charged for.
That’s how I feel about arch, it’s not “stable” but the few issues I’ve had they typically have it fixed with an update within hours.
I do have to clarify when I switched to arch from windows my entire computer was brand new and practically no other distro booted or if it installed it dumped me to a black screen.
After running my server on archlinux with the stable kernel for 7 years I did install Debian on my new server. Zfs just required an older lts kernel than I could get on arch without a ton of hassle. I didn’t need it on my Mac mini with an external hard drive plugged in. From my experience it’s not very different to maintain compared to arch but it’s nice having built in automation instead of writing my own.
Man it’s weird using a system of what I can guess is a bunch of bash scripts on Debian to set things up compared to just using the tools built into and written for systemd.
“stable” in this case means that it doesn’t change often. Debian stable is called that because no major version changes are performed during the entire cycle of a release.
It doesn’t mean “stable” as in “never crashes”, although Debian is good at that too.
Arch is definitely not “stable” using that definition!
Yeah, I know the definition. I knew someone would quote it verbatim, someone always does. I quoted it because it’s not the word I would use. I like scheduled or versioned releases better but someone always disagrees with me. As far as I’ve seen it’s a major/minor version release cycle anyway.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.