Isn’t nix mostly for multi-system install? I did the nix thing a few years ago, spent a month on the config, and then never needed it again. Personally, I don’t see a use-case for single desktop installation ;)
I use multiple systems and even I feel NixOS is overkill, especially with their confusing and sometimes incomplete documentation.
On the other hand, Nix the package manager has been fantastic - especially if you’re on an immutable OS, or running some ancient “stable” distro - you can get all the packages you want, without breaking your system - and no need to learn the Nix language and write convoluted config files.
I’m running nix on my PC turned server, and there’s definitely a lot of advantages…I highly recommend it for people who can pick up languages easily and prefer fixing a problem once by brute force trial and error.
Doing easy things is much harder, but doing hard things can be laughably easy
I probably wouldn’t pick it as-is for my primary PC, but for a server? Amazing.
ping 8.8.8.8 fails, and I don’t have traceroute installed (and no internet to install it)
<span style="color:#323232;">tubbadu@debianserver:~$ ip route show
</span><span style="color:#323232;">0.0.0.0 dev veth3492bf7 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">0.0.0.0 dev vethc1bf668 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">0.0.0.0 dev vethb41fd7e scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">0.0.0.0 dev veth2e39932 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">0.0.0.0 dev veth68451d9 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">default dev veth3492bf7 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">default dev vethc1bf668 scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">default dev vethb41fd7e scope link
</span><span style="color:#323232;">default via 192.168.1.1 dev enp1s0
</span><span style="color:#323232;">169.254.0.0/16 dev veth68451d9 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.210.75
</span><span style="color:#323232;">169.254.0.0/16 dev veth2e39932 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.242.12
</span><span style="color:#323232;">169.254.0.0/16 dev vethb41fd7e proto kernel scope link src 169.254.185.90
</span><span style="color:#323232;">169.254.0.0/16 dev vethc1bf668 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.225.22
</span><span style="color:#323232;">169.254.0.0/16 dev veth3492bf7 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.123.220
</span><span style="color:#323232;">172.17.0.0/16 dev docker0 proto kernel scope link src 172.17.0.1 linkdown
</span><span style="color:#323232;">172.18.0.0/16 dev br-56cf32fc7cde proto kernel scope link src 172.18.0.1
</span><span style="color:#323232;">192.168.1.0/24 dev enp1s0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.9
</span><span style="color:#323232;">192.168.1.1 dev enp1s0 scope link
</span>
This is kind of a nutty network config. It looks like docker is setting up extra default routes, which I could easily see fouling everything up. As a first experiment (warning, this may ruin your networking until the next reboot):
ip route flush 0/0
ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 dev enp1s0
... and see if that makes things work (start with ping 192.168.1.1 and ping 8.8.8.8). If that solves the problem, then I think something about your docker config is adding stuff to your networking that's causing the problem; maybe remove/disable docker completely and then re-add docker things one at a time to see where the problem comes in.
okay, I thought to have solved the problem but I was wrong, here I go again. When I docker compose up -d the immich server (the only one I have installed) all those routes are created, and apparently some of them conflicts with something else and now my host has no internet connection. however it seems that ip route flush 0/0 solves the problem until the reboot, which is strange. the other command returns RTNETLINK answers: File exists
Hm. Yeah, that's weird. The default routes you're seeing should basically never exist, so it sounds like there's some kind of manual network config happening inside the Docker container that's creating a broken network.
What does docker network inspect [network] say for each of your Docker networks (substituting each Docker network for "[network]")? What's the network section of docker-compose.yml look like?
I like the slide-down ones so Guake or ddterm (a Gnome shell extension). I always remap caps lock to control and the “Caps Lock” + tilde shortcut to get to the terminal is such a part of my muscle memory that I think I’d lose my mind trying to change at this point.
Nextcloud is really great for this. There is clients for all desktop and mobile OS. I am hosting this myself on my VPS however you can however use this service here: nextcloud.com/sign-up/
their website says they host it for you and provides this list of providers…
How about this then. While your neighbors are using wine, it attracts more commercial attention to develop the open source projects that you do actually use. It’s so impactful that you measurably benefit directly from its contributions, like optimizations to the Linux kernel.
You don’t have to agree with it, but you cannot deny the increased investment in open source projects it causes.
For a painfully blatant example see: Steam Deck.
Also for the binary blob purists, how do you feel about all that closed source firmware underpinning your pure world? Isn’t it practically impossible to get completely open source firmware down to the silicon? And even then, do you trust the silicon? Are you running everything on FPGAs?
Hi! “Binary blob purist” here! Yes, it bothers us that so much firmware is proprietary, but we are working to fix that :).
It is possible to have fully free firmware on certain select devices.
The silicon is unchangeable, much like a chair is unchangeable. So being concerned about changing it isn’t really productive. But, RISCV looks promising and a good remedy to the issue of not knowing what it does.
FPGAs would be nice but they aren’t powerful enough yet.
But, at the same time, unless the silicon can make outside connections itself or modify behaviour (a la Intel ME), or has been updated with what is essentially software baked into it that can change it’s behaviour on the fly, I’d say it can be trusted to do the computing you tell it to do and nothing more (again, excluding those processors where we know that it doesn’t like those with the ME).
It’s a miracle we have wine at all, reverse engineering an entire operating system isn’t easy. Be grateful for what we have (which is already enough to run a ton of software really well)
reverse engineering an entire operating system isn’t easy
Have you noticed the the NT / Windows XP source code was leaked years ago. There’s isn’t much of a need to “reverse engineering”, it’s just about reading their implementation and providing an alternative implementation that doesn’t copy code…
Didn’t companies have to set up ethics walls to protect against lawsuits for things like that?
What are you talking about? There’s copyright infringement that when you copy the leaked Windows source code into something like Wine or ReactOS and then there’s reading it to understand what Microsoft did and coming up with an alternative implementation that will provide a compatible API for programs to use. There’s no “gray zone” or ethical BS - it’s either copied or not.
See the bit about examples and IBM. While you could probably look, the easiest way to defend against a giant tech company’s legal team is to do the clean room setup
Guess that rule was in place because some people would look at it and proceed to copy it. The rule should be “if you copy code from Microsoft you’ll be kicked from the project and the code removed”. While I see why this is place and what it protect the project from this is also a very big roadblock to the project’s evolution and a clear example of what’s wrong with it and why we still have compatibility issues.
Nope, because if you write code and they can prove you were influenced by leaked proprietary code in any way then they will sue the shit out of you and shut you down.
Also see Halt and Catch Fire for a show with this as a plot point. It’s very real though.
Well at least I’m not here perpetuating the delusion that desktop Linux desktop is as user-friendly and productive for every use-case as Windows and macOS are. If one lives in a bubble and doesn’t to collaborate with others then native Linux apps might work and might even deliver a decent workflow. Once collaboration with Windows/Mac users is required then it’s game over – the “alternatives” aren’t just up to it.
Windows licenses are cheap and things work out of the box. Software runs fine, all vendors support whatever you’re trying to do and you’re productive from day zero. Sure, there are annoyances from time to time, but they’re way fewer and simpler to deal with than the hoops you’ve to go through to get a minimal and viable/productive Linux desktop experience.
It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
Just buy a windows license next time.
Here’s the thing, I can get a legit Windows license by various means. I don’t need to go into microsoft.com and get it for 300$, a second hand windows machine with an old i5 CPU will sell for 50$ and that includes a valid Windows license. Computers selling on retail stores also include a Windows license, students can get them for free etc. what else?
Well at least I’m not here perpetuating the delusion that desktop Linux desktop is as user-friendly and productive for every use-case as Windows and macOS are.
Wait, are you saying Windows and macOS are user-friendly and productive for every use-case? That’s hilarious!
Oh yes, I value and like Linux a LOT… just not for desktop as it doesn’t deliver as everyone says it does. To be fair I believe that only someone who values Linux as much as I do would be comfortable to criticize what’s wrong with it.
Well I can’t spend all my time trying to fix ridiculous issues that would’ve been fixed by now if people had the balls to look at Windows XP source code…
You’re doing something worse, complaining about something that no one really does. The average Linux user doesn’t want the average computer user to install Arch Linux. Stop spamming this garbage.
Instead of leaving snide comments like this, you can use your head to open up an IDE, implement the features you want, and make a pull request. Keep it to yourself
usually when I have problems with YubiKey being detected it is because the pcscd service has not been started, or I forgot to enable it so it would start automatically on boot.
I’m using GNOME Wayland on Fedora 39 and I don’t have the problem you describe. I just go to settings and select my keyboard layouts:
English (US, intl., with dead keys)
English (intl., with AltGr dead keys)
And everything just works. I specially like the second one because it doesn’t interfere with keybindings in games, which can be a problem in GNOME Wayland.
Oh, I think I get the issue you’re having, you can’t find the Çç character on the Linux layout 😅 I always have to explain this to people migrating from Windows, it’s AltGr+, (right Alt key plus Comma). I like this shortcut better than the Windows layout, but I understand some people might not like it. Unfortunately, I can’t answer your question, as I too don’t know how to customize the keyboard layout. I just got used to the Linux layout.
You should be able to type ç the way I described for all apps, so you could just remove your custom layout. I highly recommend the English (intl., with AltGr dead keys) layout, it’s perfect for coding and writing in English. It’s a bit more work to write in Portuguese, though, so it took me a while to get used to it, but it’s worth it if coding is what you’re doing most of the time. In this layout, you must hold AltGr to get the dead keys, otherwise it’s a normal English layout.
You can also use two layouts — one for English/coding, one for Portuguese — and the keyboard shortcut Super+Space to switch between them. I always have two layouts setup like this, but I never switch anymore because I just learned to love the English (intl., with AltGr dead keys) layout — and I don’t write much Portuguese nowadays.
Are you talking about 2FA login for your own user account or U2F/PIV/WebAuthn in your browser? The latter seems to work out of the box on any non-snap or flatpak browser, but the former needs a bit more setup as that is not a standard feature in Ubuntu yet. I recommend using ykman and yubico-piv-tool for configuring yubikeys in linux, but Yubico also provides a GUI application on their website
Definitely the latter. I have only tried using the Flatpak version of Firefox, but the system won’t even detect the key so it’s no shock Firefox can’t either…
linux
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.