I use an 6900 XT and run llama.cpp and ComfyUI inside of Docker containers. I don’t think the RX590 is officially supported by ROCm, there’s an environment variable you can set to enable support for unsupported GPUs but I’m not sure how well it works.
AMD provides the handy rocm/dev-ubuntu-22.04:5.7-complete image which is absolutely massive in size but comes with everything needed to run ROCm without dependency hell on the host. I just build a llama.cpp and ComfyUI container on top of that and run it.
Indeed. It feels very mature and no nonsense like, all over. The only thing that bothers me a bit are some „qol things“ like being able to switch mirrors if you made a bad choice or to easily choose german keyboard while leaving the OS in english for easier troubleshooting online.
So the pattern here seems to be „debian shows that it is community made and you can help make it better in opposition to ubuntu which is commercial and your participation helps both the community and the company“
I get that you have the choice at install on debian which is nice, but the flavors and choices of Ubuntu (eg kubuntu ) are super readily available when making your install media. And I unless you are making it a game time decision as you go through the installer, which I doubt most people are, this seems like an incredibly trivial distinction.
Thats viewing it only from one angle. People who are not totally familiar with what desktop environments are might not even consider kubuntu, lubuntu or xubuntu since they are viewed as seperate OSes by some.
Having this menu is very easy to implement but the possibilities are great.
That sounds great. The last driver they released fixed Starfield but broke Cyberpunk for me, pretty bad trade. Hopefully this rolls around to my distro soon
Good but slow. Zypper has nice features but for some reason it can only download one package at a time. There is a GitHub issue about this that has been around for years.
anything that isnt very hard to run should be fine. ive personally ran a distro on an early 2012/2013 mac and it worked just fine. forgot what one but i know it was a very common mainstream one. i also somehow got kali on it so that was interesting too. if you want something easy and simple you should probably use mint or debian if they support imacs, otherwise? its really down to personal pref
Yeah, the idea is something simple and stable. Stable because I don’t want to babysit the OS (I already do that at work), and simple so my wife can also use it in case of need. She only know windows so anything the comes close in terms of UI is “ok” for her. The real choice was between KDE or cinnamon. Eventually opted for Mint/Debian
I don’t have any previous knowledge of this at all, but from reading the docs, nothing you’re describing sounds wrong.
A u32 selector will match 4 bytes (u32 meaning unsigned 32bit presumably, which is 4 bytes).
It makes sense that you’d only be able to configure the matches on 4 byte intervals, because keeping them aligned may make the implementation simpler and more efficient. You can still match any set of bits this way.
Perhaps you could describe what you’re trying to match exactly and the selectors you tried.
I really appreciate this, thank you. I think I had confused myself by playing with ‘u16’ and ‘u8’ and somehow coming to the conclusion that they were matching the right side of a 32-bit string. (Which may still be true, but, I’m just masking u32s now).
This is what I ended up with, which is working the way I’d expect:
<span style="color:#323232;">tc filter add dev wlan0 protocol ip parent 1: prio 1 u32
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> match u32 0x30d6 0x0000ffff at -16
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> match u32 0xc92d1905 0xffffffff at -12 flowid 1:20
</span>
This sends Ethernet frames destined for 30:d6:c9:2d:19:05 to flow 1:20, and it doesn’t seem to match a second device I tested. So, all good! Thank you again.
No - I’ve been working on a headless server, and ideally I need this thing to be written into /etc/fstab and work reliably from the command line. I could plug the drive into my laptop to have a look in some GUI tools if you think there’s one around that can circumvent the sector size mismatch, but in the end I’ll need a CLI method.
Gotcha. Worst case, if you can mount it using any tool (GUI or CLI), then maybe you can copy its contents to another drive, reformat it, and copy the contents back.
Ubuntu is Debian anyway. Why not installing MX (based on Debian too) with XFCE, it is the best experience I have had.
I come from good old LFS from the 90s and for me, a distro is just a kernel with some GNU utils, a window manager, and a way to get packages (which is about the only diff between “distro”)
Makes sense. This is also what I deduced after installing arch in a vm. Its basically just a couple options. It would be awesome to have a distro where you can just mix and match all the things.
The whole WM landscape of Linux was a big turn off for me. I had used CDE on Solaris before and never really thought about choosing or customizing my DE. That was one of the big reasons I ended up loving OSX (no choice of WM and very few customization options, along with globally consistent hotkeys) and ended up using that as my primary GUI Unix environment, along with headless Linux for most of the last ~20 years.
Right. Actually one of the things I love about Linux is that it offers so many options so you can make your own combination to create the perfect system for your specific needs.
You can get all the visual distractions out of your way and tweak litterally everything to an incredible granular level. No other OS can pretend to be so user focused while staying so simple in appearance. You’re not adapting to your system, it’s built for you.
The problem I have with customization options is that I don’t want to customize it, and when I go looking for a setting to change, I don’t want to be drowning in options that I’ll never use. The way I always thought about it is when I buy a saw or a hammer, I go straight to using it. I don’t customize my saw or hammer. That’s not why I buy them. I buy them to build things with them. The tool is not the end goal. Similarly, the DE is not the end goal. I want to spend time getting work done, not spend time customizing my environment.
Recently though I’ve been looking around again a little bit, looking for a DE that has what I want out of the box. LXDE seems closest so far.
We’re exactly on the same page: “the tool is not the goal”. The only difference may be that I see chosing options for an app as options for a tool. If I want to cut wood or metal I need a different saw. Even though the tool is basically the same it doesn’t serve the same purpose. Hence I configure options once and for all, like I would consider which hardware I need exactly in terms of use, ergonomic, power… before buying it.
I don’t spend time tweaking the look of a tool because it’s doesn’t fit my approach of things anymore. As such I don’t even use a DE. But I feel the need to build the right tool (i.e. system app) I need to perform a job as efficiently as possible while keeping the tool itself minimalist and as invisible as possible. On my daily use I have tools that I couldn’t live without anymore but if you ask me a list I will either forgot them or put them at the bottom because I will not think about them right away since they became a second nature.
I certainly see the comfort of the out of the box approach and it can serve a lot of people. In my use case I just realize that - using the example above - it could be like using a wood saw on metal in some cases. It may work but not as good as you would expect to have the job done properly. Also, the fit them all approach means building an app with tons of options activated and I prefer to have available to me only the options I really need. The philosophy feels less bloated to me and I’m not overloading my system with stuff I’ll never use. It’s more time consuming at first to chose the right app but with time it became quick enough and it definitely save me way more time in the long run when I use my system.
The driver runs in the kernel, distrobox still uses the host kernel as it is container based so no, you can not run two different drivers on host and in distrobox. That wouldn’t even work in a VM though unless you have a second GPU you pass through to the VM. How do you imagine one piece of hardware to be simultaneously controlled by two different drivers?
I’m not really sure (I’ve never tried to run linux on a mac except once on a 2013 (or 2012 or 2011) 13" macbook pro (I tried ubuntu and debian stable) but the keyboard was playing up and the trackpad didn’t work while it was charging (all hardware problems, they happened in macos as well)(this was in 2021 or 2022)), but given the age of your device any modern distros should be fine.
Installed Mint on a 2013 Macbook pro retina a few months ago, only thing not working for me was screen brightness with the proprietary Nvidia driver but was able to correct it.
Yeah just had a look, mine’s an early 2011 13" macbook pro with 4GB ram, i5 or i7 cpu, a broken 500GB HDD, a trackpad that doesn’t work if it’s charging, and also the keyboard will randomly spam “m” (or maybe it’s “b”). I could probs fix it, but idk if it’d be worth it lol
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.