Something like this to restore the fun mindless games of the 2000’s is definitely needed. Basic HTML webpages with links to ad free browser games, the internet had so much fun free stuff for kids, now its like 5 websites that track your every move
Ubuntu because they’ve the ability to great things and end up just delivering a buggy and mangled version of Debian with proprietary crap, spyware, snaps wtv. After all we’re talking about the distro that had ISOs on their download page with a broken installer multiple times.
I don’t hate them, but this hits hard. They are THE most influential distro for people outside of the community. They have by far the biggest user base and community, but instead of using this to collaborate with other distributions and specially with the freedesktop folks for the improvement of the commons, they have this culture of downstream work that rarely get the effort needed to be upstreamed. It’s usually “it’s good enough for us, so that’s where we’ll leave it”, and they end up with these weird solutions that only they use.
It’s usually “it’s good enough for us, so that’s where we’ll leave it”, and they end up with these weird solutions that only they use.
Exactly. And to make things even worse then you’ve people upstream (Debian) or sidestream (other distros) that eventually decide to implement whatever they did but properly and then they go there, pick it and replace their original implementation.
The problem is that 3rd parties are doing the packaging both on Snap and Flatpak whereas if they had followed proper security practice ONLY THE REAL DEV should ever be allowed to package their app as a Flatpak or Snap.
This would ensure security, as well as a proper functioning flatpak/snap and also all feedback would be directed to the Dev.
I’ve never liked the fact that Canonical and whoever can make Snaps and Flatpaks of other people’s software. There is zero security guarantee, zero guarantee they’ll update it and zero guarantee it will work.
Just because Snap and Flatpak exist doesn’t mean just anyone should be able to just make them.
If Valve only chooses to make a deb then so be it! It’s their product!
The problem is that 3rd parties are doing the packaging both on Snap and Flatpak whereas if they had followed proper security practice ONLY THE REAL DEV should ever be allowed to package their app as a Flatpak or Snap.
Says who? If it were the case, Linux would either be a nightmare of fragmentation or become centralised on one distribution. Distros need to be able to package their own software, and these are kind of like distributions. Also since we’re talking about proprietary software here, is it really any better security practice if the “real dev” packages it or somebody else, they both could contain malicious code.
Valve are not going to put malicious code on their app. Neither is VLC or any other FOSS developer.
The distros should stick to packaging their repo apps and leave the Snap/FlatPak tech as an alternative to the original dev if they decide they want to use that.
We can’t have Bob from nowhere packaging Valve, then not updating it or patching it because he doesn’t have time. Or 5 Bob’s all doing the same thing with 5 copies of Valve on the Store.
It’s crazy. This is what causes fragmentation. Flathub should vet every app and if you are not the dev of the app, you may not host it on Flathub. You’re still welcome to make a Flatpak for home use on your own pc but not for wide distribution.
Valve are not going to put malicious code on their app. Neither is VLC or any other FOSS developer.
How would you know that? It’s not like it’s something that doesn’t happen.
Or 5 Bob’s all doing the same thing with 5 copies of Valve on the Store.
It’s crazy. This is what causes fragmentation.
I don’t know what snaps are like but that’s clearly a non-existent problem on Flathub.
Flathub should vet every app and if you are not the dev of the app, you may not host it on Flathub. You’re still welcome to make a Flatpak for home use on your own pc but not for wide distribution.
I don’t know why you feel like there’s permission involved. You don’t have to use Flathub, therefore Flathub can have what ever policies it likes. Users can set up a different flatpak repo if there’s a need.
That’s not my point. I use Flathub but I try to only use verified apps which were packaged by the actual dev.
I’d rather get a deb from the official dev than a flatpak from flathub packaged by someone who is essentially anonymous and could easily inject malicious code.
If you think the dev himself could inject malicious code in the official app, then you should be super aware that an anonymous Joe can too, and is far more likely to.
Anyway flatpak ideally was supposed to save Devs the work of packaging for every distro so it makes sense that the real actual verified dev of the app would package the flatpak/snap himself
The official Developer of the app. E.g. the official dev of Blender is blender.org. The flatpak people give them a line of code to embed in their website and they use that to verify that the dev really is blender.org and not a malicious actor.
How so? How does ensuring they only the real dev of the app is also the only one allowed to package it hurt desktop adoption.
It’s very easy to enforce. Flathub need to verify the identity of the person submitting the Flatpak to make sure it’s the app’s dev uploading it and not Joe Smith or nsa.gov…
Yes, which is why it is a little odd for the article author to include it without context, because we all immediately think of one social mistake that has nothing to do with Linux.
He did mention the murder of his wife and said he would detail his regret to anyone who asked. The rest of the letter describes the “social mistakes” in dealing with co-workers and the Linux community. He even asks that those co-workers’ names be added to the credits and his negative comments about them be deleted. There’s no forgiving what he did to his wife but there’s at least some evidence he’s changed since that happened.
He did mention the murder of his wife and said he would detail his regret to anyone who asked.
This is true - I’m reacting more to the title than the content. It’s a very peculiar choice of words.
There’s no forgiving what he did to his wife but there’s at least some evidence he’s changed since that happened.
Perhaps - it’s hard to tell. It still reads a lot like one of his standard narcissistic rants even as he’s complimenting others. It’s still all about his “dream”.
I’m not a doctor but he certainly seems neurodivergent based on his writing. It’s hard to imagine him ever changing in some significant way and being “rehabilitated” enough to be allowed back into society, hence the “some evidence”. It’s might be best he remains in jail rather than be paroled.
Yeah - I mean - I don’t want to get into the business of analyzing somebody’s metal state but he definitely seems to have issues with fixation. But I also don’t want to cross the line into saying that he’s necessarily dangerous because of that. He’s dangerous for other reasons though. I agree with your “some evidence” line in that he does seem to be focusing on the part of his personality that does seem to be the most dangerous - inability to manage conflict. Prison does provide for that conflict - but it also provides many rules and structures that he wouldn’t have on the outside. Dunno. I have a difficult time saying that anybody who has murdered their wife should ever see freedom again at all - “reformed” or not.
Thanks for sharing this. I’ve been jobless for the two years since I’ve graduated, and the shame of being a useless bum, and having my freedom restricted due to monetary dependency has been killing me from the inside.
I have no idea who would think you are useless because you don’t have a job. Are you American? Because I think that culture is slightly mentally ill about associating personal value to what job you have.
I’d recommend finding some FOSS projects to contribute to so that you can stay sharp and also add stuff to your resume. Plenty out there that needs worked on, and not all of it can be done by people working full time at another job.
No shame, job market for tech is fucking tough right now, but it will improve. In the meantime, keep your skills fresh. Start some projects of your own that will help you pick up the necessary skills and stay relevant and do freelance jobs on Upwork and similar services.
I was in a very similar situation as you just a few months ago. Worked with several freelance clients and one of them hired me on full time. Pays well and full remote, and luckily in an area that’s isolated from all the craziness happening right now.
You got this! A CSE bachelor’s is way too valuable to stay a bum for long.
I looked into this a bit more and here is the summary: This is meant to show off a candidate kernel feature that allows for running different schedulers in userland.
Task scheduling has become much more complex as CPUs have grown in size and have had new developments in architecture, so the need to develop more complex and robust schedulers is steadily rising.
The kernel feature is meant to lower the barrier of entry for anyone who wants to try getting into schedulers, as well as enable quicker development iteration, by removing the need to completely recompile the linux kernel every time you want to test your code.
Not quite running in userspace. To the best of my own understanding:
The new kernel feature is to allow writing schedulers in eBPF, a “language” the kernel runs in kernelspace that is heavily restricted.
For example, all eBPF programs must complete in bounded time, and the kernel’s static checker must be able to verify that before the program can even begin executing. eBPF is a rare language that is not touring complete.
“For scx_simple, suspending the scheduler process doesn’t affect scheduling behavior because all that the userspace component does is print statistics. This doesn’t hold for all schedulers.”
So, it may be that eBPF also makes it easier to write a truly userspace scheduler, but that’s not the primary purpose, and it’s not what is being done with scx_simple.
[W]ould anyone have spent this much time and effort writing about how much they hated Unix if they didn’t secretly love it? I’ll leave that to the readers to judge, but in the end, it really doesn’t matter: If this book doesn’t kill Unix, nothing will.
Hahaha same on the distcc cluster. It was a rare proud moment for me many years ago. I rememeber when I got the cross compiling working it felt like magic. Good times.
linux
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.