I honestly don’t get these posts, there’s a couple of things that is super weird.
Why does every discussion about Wayland include trashing xorg?
Isn’t the solution pretty obvious, stop mainting xorg if you don’t like to maintain xorg, who is forcing you to maintain xorg?
I really don’t care if I’m using xorg or wayland, I just want something that works, and I have tried wayland and that isn’t the case as of the moment. And I don’t care about the why, because I can’t be like yeah I use Wayland that’s why I can’t be on this video conference.
Just stop mainting it if you don’t want to maintain it, problem solved, move on.
Seems like a redhat problem, so why is he complaining. It wasn’t the developer who signed an agreement to maintain xorg, so I don’t get the argument. Either you do it for the money you get paid, and if you don’t feel like it’s enough, then don’t do it. The developer can just quit and do something else, ask for another project. The only one who is making him work on xorg is redhat.
But why even mention m it in the same context as Wayland, make Wayland work for the end user and 90% of people would not care if thier Linux machine was using Wayland or xorg.
Yes I’ve had multiple issues with video conferencing on Wayland, but my experience is 1 - 2 years old. I just use what works, I don’t have any technical problems with xorg and that is why I use it.
Why does every discussion about Wayland include trashing xorg?
I don’t know, really, but it’s something I feel I’ve seen before. I thought about it and it’s just fanboyism.
Some people get legitimately angry when they see someone using something they don’t like, and I think Wayland fanboys fit in this category to a tee.
I see the exact same kind of backlash whenever someone brings up Nvidia or Manjaro. The fanboys come out and all take it as an opportunity to recommend what they like because they believe their tastes are superior to everyone else’s.
I can’t say I’m a huge fan of btrfs, in my limited sample size of one I had several episodes of esoteric errors and data loss. It’s anecdotal but filesystems have never been something to give me trouble in any other scenario to date. They just exist and do their job silently in my experience, except for btrfs.
This is what I thought too, but in my case it turned out my drive was busted and btrfs detected an error and went read only… which was super annoying and my initial reaction was “ugh, piece of shit filesystem!” But ultimately I’m grateful it noticed something was wrong with the drive. If I was just using ext4 I just would have had silent data corruption. In that sense other filesystems do silently do their jobs… but they also potentially fail silently which is a little scary. Checksums are nice.
Are you sure S3 sleep is enabled in the bios? On most machines it’s one or the other, not both at the same time. On some Intel machines you can still enable S3 standby, but I know AMD killed it a lot sooner than Intel did.
Windows has powercfg /availablesleepstates to show what states are supported. I’m sure there’s something like that for linux but I’m not 100% sure. You could try dmesg | grep -i “acpi: (supports”
Microsoft says it’s more secure. and that since it stays on its 100% the OSes control which is supposed to be much more secure”reliable” than S3 standby.
Nevermind that S0 standby is so incredibly buggy and awful on windows where it’s supposed to be best. My i9 Thinkpad drops 20% battery in 15 minutes, then goes into hibernation. It has a 50% chance of overheating in my bag and crashing when trying to get in to hibernation.
May I point out that all a RAID1 does is sync the blocks between two drives. It won’t protect against writing something dumb that would mess up the filesystem, it will just dutifully sync it.
You should be able to back up ext data from a filesystem on a RAID array, unless I’m confused about what e2image actually does. Are you trying to use it on the underlying drive devices by any chance? You have to point it at the RAID device on top of them, something like /dev/md1 rather than /dev/sda1.
This sounds like a good extra backup to have but don’t let it lull you into a false sense of security. It may help recover from a very specific kind of mistake but the recovery may be very specific as well. It’s not file backup.
Install x2go on the client machine. You need X and SSH on the target machine. That’s it, when you connect it will open a new desktop session on the server.
If you want to connect to an existing desktop session you need x2godesktopsharing installed on the target, you need to activate sharing in x2godesktopsharing, and in x2go client you need to select “session type” as “X2Go/X11 desktop sharing”.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.