Provided you don’t want to play one of the few games that refuse to enable Linux support on their anticheat I’ve found my PC can run games designed to run on windows far more smoothly now than they ever did on windows
You COULD probably do it like this if you want to gain experience with ansible. Otherwise it’s total overkill. Just write down a list of must-have apps that you currently use and install them manually in the new system. It’s always a nice opportunity to start fresh and clean.
It’s fun and games… until you get lots of “…just like X command?” commentaries from randoms. Until you get sick of such and decide to do something non-productive instead. Unless there is money included in the former.
I also switched to Arch about a month ago, and I’ve been so surprised at how easy gaming on Linux has become. Even some games that use AntiCheat like Apex Legends run absolutely great.
I had to switch to X11 though, but that’s the fault of NVIDIA because the drivers are still causing problems on Wayland.
I have the same experience. It’s amazing how easy we to switch for gaming that is. I don’t really use my personal pc for productivity but I do some video and pic editing so I’ll cross that bridge then.
Thanks. I tried both, and Shotcut was the one where I actually understood how to import, edit and export a video without consulting the manual, so I’m going with that.
This latest UKI work for Fedora will lead to better UEFI Secure Boot support, better supporting TPM measurements and confidential computing, and a more robust boot process.
and HOPEFULLY lead to a less jerky-flashy-switchy boot xperience, looks like a Vegas light show at present. switched to systemd-boot, but it’s only a tiny bit better, still switches modes/blanks screen like five times.
Omg yes, I hate those. I’m sitting here thinking it’s probably one of those simple things that scares people away from Linux…“Oh god, I see black text on white background. Abort, abort, ABORT!!”
yeah, if you don’t have an encrypted drive (which I’m gonna do on a laptop NEVER) on some OEMs this can look semi-seamless.
here’s what it looks like on a laptop:
OEM logo
screen goes blank, backlight off
light on, OEM logo
blank screen
decrypt password
blank screen
loading spinner with OEM logo
gdm/sddm login screen
blank screen
9a. (sddm) loading animation
9b. (sddm) jerk when fractional scaling kicks in
and finally there’s the desktop
with additional mode switching interjected and occasionally the horror that is GRUB inserts a ‘Loading blah blah’ text message; thankfully we’re getting rid of that.
My HP crapbook doesn’t have this OEM logo bullshit. Only the windows bootloader shows it, and the logo file is stored in the BGRT. So I don’t think I’m affected unless the WBM or systemd-boot have this vuln.
Mine:
<span style="color:#323232;">1. Screen turns on
</span><span style="color:#323232;">2. I pick EndeavorOS in systemd-boot
</span><span style="color:#323232;">3. It starts spitting out logs (I love this behavior)
</span><span style="color:#323232;">4. It switches modes once the backlight is loaded
</span><span style="color:#323232;">5. I log in
</span><span style="color:#323232;">6. KDE loads
</span>
I will never understand people who install Plymouth, it just adds complexity in the boot process. If your distro installs this then I understand why: so it doesn’t look like you’re “hacking the government”. If your distro doesn’t install it and you install it then you probably picked the wrong distro.
It’s not all “purists” and “tribalism”, Manjaro actually has issues. Besides the well known certificate issues and older packages, I have the following anecdote which made me really dislike it.
A friend has Manjaro and one day his nvidia drivers stopped working after an update. I helped troubleshoot over the phone, while looking over the wiki. For nvidia drivers they have their own wrapper around pacman.
Turns out there’s a different nvidia driver for each kernel version. Already a stupid design. So unlike arch where there’s 1 kernel package (the latest the distro offers) and 1 matching nvidia driver, Manjaro has dozens…
The wiki never mentions how to install or update the drivers manually with pacman or anything like that. It pushes their own tool, a stupid wrapper around pacman, which is supposed to manage this for you.
In my friend’s case, the tool failed. It was trying to run pacman but there was a conflict issue. But the tool didn’t show the pacman output, so we couldn’t figure out what the tool is trying to do, and why it doesn’t work. We tried removing the tool and re-installing, and all kinds of messing around with it. It failed to install the drivers, it failed to remove the drivers, it kept failing whatever we tried.
Eventually we figured out the naming convention they used for the packages (again not mentioned in the wiki), and manage to install the correct kernel - driver pair manually, using pacman.
Tl;dr: poor design, bad documentation, and they push their own crappy tools which hinder instead of helping
there’s a different nvidia driver for each kernel version. Already a stupid design
That’s not a stupid design at all. A nvidia kernel module artifact is only compatible with exactly one kernel ABI. Thus you need one binary nvidia package for each kernel you ship.
Arch also has one package for every kernel ABI they ship: nvidia and nvidia-lts.
Though it should be noted that their design assumes that these two ABIs are the only possible ABIs which isn’t strictly the case as the zen, hardened or RT variants may sometimes lag behind their regular counterpart. That’s a stupid design if anything as it increases the friction of kernel ABI upgrades as a kernel package maintainer.
We at NixOS also ship the nvidia module for each of our ~50 kernel variants; all major versions of the Nvidia module compatible with that kernel in fact.
The only possible way to access these nvidia kernel modules is via a certain kernel’s linuxPackages attribute set that contains all packages that rely on a kernel ABI such as kernel modules or packages like perf. That’s good design if you ask me but I’m obviously biased ;)
I know you need a new nvidia driver every time the kernel updates, but why keep 50 kernel versions? My beef was them offering so many (outdated) versions instead of keeping the latest one which would make things very simple for users (imo).
These aren’t all versions per se but mostly variants, versions and versions of variants. For example, we have packaged the xanmod kernel which is a modified kernel optimised for desktop use but it has two variants: Main and LTS. We have packaged both.
Here are the names of all of our kernels currently to give you an idea (as a JSON list):
This is useful to have because users might have hardware constraints. It’s not hard to imagine a scenario where a user might have a WiFi chip that only works with kernel ABIs < 5.4 and require the 470 nvidia driver for their old GPU. Packaging just the latest kernel and just the latest Nvidia driver would make this user unable to use their system.
Turns out there’s a different nvidia driver for each kernel version
That is literally every version of Linux out there. IDK what you think was different about Manjaro in that respect. Nvidia hates linux and it’s a tough thing to keep it running, especially on a rolling release. Use the DKMS driver if you’re going to update kernels a lot. At least manjaro seperates the kernel installs from the general updates to minimize this disruption.
I know that these packages are “linked”, and for every kernel update you need a new nvidia driver, I don’t understand though why they keep so many kernel versions in the repo (and their respective nvidia drivers ofc). Just makes things confusing, I assume people generally want the latest kernel the distro has to offer, or if they want something else it’s a different kernel “flavor” like lts, zen, rt, etc.
That’s a question for a web developer, which I am not. I would expect it to be the max common resolution width. A quick Google shows that modern ultrawides are 5120x1440. So that’s probably why.
Lemmy does not use the entire screen width. The way it has been embedded in the page means that image takes up only 850 pixels of horizontal space so it could be 5x smaller and no one would be able to see the difference.
Lemmy really should be automatically resizing the images (on the server) when they are uploaded, not every single time the community is viewed (in the browser).
it’s not. the lemmy-ui max width for the poster element is far smaller than that (1104x960). in fact, the poster element is set to be a near-square (displays as rectangular in web and mobile web on the page header), as it also displays in the sidebar and in mobile apps as a square if the image is. most mods simply assume it’s a rectangle and upload a rectangular image.
this image is made to be the largest usable resolution lemmy can display as a community poster and optimized to be very small in file size. see on lemm.ee/c/plex
If I’m going to have a lot of icons on the desktop, I’d want one of the visually uncomplicated ones (top right, bottom left). Otherwise, if it’s just for eye-candy and what I have to see everytime my windows are minimized, I’d either go for mid-left or bottom-right. I fall into the latter category, but y’all in the former may consider that when casting your vote
This. It needs to be visually uncomplicated so I can actually see what’s living on the desktop. Because of that, I prefer bottom right the most, though I generally like much darker backgrounds. Color shift that into something darker like an alien or night scene, and it’d be perfect for me.
I’m assuming you don’t want a full disk encryption solution, but you can also use LUKS to just create an encrypted mount of any supported filesystem. You don’t need any type of standalone program to encrypt your things for you.
linux
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.