Arnavion

66 ms·

571.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Personal Linux machine mostly used for watching video, code compiling, and some light gaming. The 7950x definitely compiles my stuff much faster than the TR 2920x did, but I don't know how much of that is because of the RAM speed (6000
572.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I used ECC with a ThreadRipper 2920x on an Asrock motherboard, but for a new Ryzen 7950x build I went back to regular RAM. The problem with ECC with the TR was that only Unbuffered DIMMs work, not Registered DIMMS, and the 7950x is the same
573.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Write throughput and flash lifetime are still a concern for that.
574.
by Arnavion 3y ago
The API for creating Azure VMs doesn't support specifying an ED25519 key. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-machines/linu... But once you've created the VM you can log in and replace th
575.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Not even just "software". Back in 2018 when I still used Windows, Defender one day decided to quarantine a single text file generated by my IRC client from a few years ago, containing a plaintext log of one day's posts in a c
576.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Yes, all the proxy companies of the 2000s realized that the "Private" in "Virtual Private Network" makes for good marketing, so they all rebranded themselves as VPNs, even though they have nothing to do with actual VPNs
577.
by Arnavion 3y ago
That only blocks people with secure, locked-down browsers, so it won't be a problem for Edge users.
578.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I don't know why they would want to prevent it. It's free publicity for them with no consequences. They just have to make sure to delete it eventually.
579.
by Arnavion 3y ago
This link keeps getting brought up from time to time, so it's worth noting that it's been outdated for around two years at this point, if not more.
580.
by Arnavion 3y ago
And my point was that from "a utilitarian perspective" there's a middle ground between "coach the original author to produce a better patch" and "commit your own patch without crediting the original author&quot
581.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Yes, this has happened to me a few times (in other codebases, not the kernel). If I were in the author's shoes I'd be upset about it (and rightfully so), but I wouldn't post publicly about it like this because no good will co
582.
by Arnavion 3y ago
On the first patch that Miculas submitted with their gmail address that was not looked at by any of the parties involved in the rest of the story. The subsequent mails to linuxppc-dev where Leroy and Ellerman were involved were not cross-po
583.
by Arnavion 3y ago
>A person randomly shows up to report and attempt fix a bug in an "obscure"(?) architecture Everyone involved in this story, both the original author, the second person who authored the patch, and the maintainer who reviewed it
584.
by Arnavion 3y ago
linuxppc-dev is not a security list.
585.
by Arnavion 3y ago
>Sorry, just because you found this trivially fixable array mismatch doesn't mean your buggy patch has to be accepted the way it is. I know reading is hard, but it's not an excuse to put words in other people's mouths. &gt
586.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Nobody's saying the maintainer should have to do a never-ending code review ping pong game. The maintainer is free to come up with their version and expedite committing it. The point is that if their patch is based on the original auth
587.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I don't know the specifics of the patch either since OP has not linked their patch nor the final kernel commit. I don't understand why being a private list would be a problem since they can just post their patch on their website.
588.
by Arnavion 3y ago
A password manager can easily implement passkeys just like it implements passwords. Though last I checked no browser had created an API for extensions to implement the passkey API. KeepassXC's implementation for example has to inject J
589.
by Arnavion 3y ago
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/fo... https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/blob/e5873544... https://salsa.debian.org/bi
590.
by Arnavion 3y ago
That would still be technically misleading, since enums don't necessarily have tags due to niche optimization. Eg `Option` is an enum but `Option<Box<Foo>>` does not have any tags; it uses the content being zero to represen
591.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Indeed. The entire applovin.com domain is blocked by the "AdGuard - Mobile Ads" filter that I have enabled in uBO.
592.
by Arnavion 3y ago
They're asking that, if the programmer wants the map to store expensivetocopyvalue semantically but also doesn't want to have iteration generate expensive copies, does the programmer have to change the map to store *expensivetocop
593.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I think most online forms I encounter these days have a single name field, though government forms are usually the exception. Separate first and last name fields was definitely very common 10-20 years ago but web devs seem to have learned s
594.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Linux user. My phone runs postmarketOS.
595.
by Arnavion 3y ago
IIRC the compiler runs plugins in two stages. The first stage gets the AST before any typechecking and it can make modifications to the AST; macros and some clippy lints run in this stage. The second stage runs after typechecking so it gets
596.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I didn't know KeePass(XC) had sync plugins, let alone eight, since I just sync the file myself as part of the same infrastructure that syncs everything else under my homedir.
597.
by Arnavion 3y ago
This is not a wayland (the protocol) issue. It's a client issue. In fact Qt6 was recently in the news here for having fixed it in their client code, by simply reconnecting when the wayland socket closes instead of crashing. https:&#x2
598.
by Arnavion 3y ago
I use /srv for a personal webserver just because I need the webserver data to be on a separate partition for disk space reasons, and it's convenient to have systemd-gpt-auto-generator automatically mount a partition to /srv w
599.
by Arnavion 3y ago
Unity already has UnityEngine.Analytics.dll since 2018, and it claims to be GDPR-compliant.
600.
by Arnavion 3y ago
What your Wikipedia link says is already correct, ie that 3000BC is when kaliyuga started. The start of kaliyuga is not when the universe was created. Kaliyuga is just the last four hundred thousand years of a four million-year cycle, at th

More ›