CrLf

23 ms·

211.
by CrLf 10y ago
I believe that CentOS doesn't release sooner when these point releases happen upstream (compared to regular errata updates) may have to do with ensuring packages outside the ones sourced directly from RHEL don't break. Packages in
212.
by CrLf 10y ago
"all change is not progress as all movement is not forward"
213.
by CrLf 10y ago
The Earth's population isn't getting any lower, those 10 jobs lost mean 10 people that will need support from the rest of society, just to survive. It's utopian to think job losses mean everybody gets their workload reduced,
214.
by CrLf 10y ago
It's actually an incentive to not take the product of the shelf (i.e. not buying it).
215.
by CrLf 10y ago
I am unsure we are evolving. We have evolved in many areas that solve real problems, like healthcare and such, but I'm not sure today's society is any better for all the technology that allows us to save a couple of minutes in a q
216.
by CrLf 10y ago
It's also true for CRUD app #34, because the hard part is never the implementation, it's dealing with shifting requirements, either due to the nature of businesses, unsufficient understanding of the problem being solved or sabotag
217.
by CrLf 10y ago
Because software development is actually research disguised as engineering. (And that's why "engineering" when related to software is filled with mumbo-jumbo and cargo-cultism.)
218.
by CrLf 10y ago
I agree. But that doesn't require showing that separation to users. Varnish could internally separate TLS from the rest while still behaving as a single service.
219.
by CrLf 10y ago
Doing HTTP separately from TLS in 2016 isn't doing "one thing" well, it's doing "half a thing." If you're serving HTTPS to clients and your backends are also HTTPS, you quickly get into a mess of extra com
220.
by CrLf 10y ago
I've used varnish in the past, but I have trouble understanding where it fits in the stack right now. It doesn't do TLS. Something else needs to be put in front of it to terminate HTTPS connections. HTTP/2 support is planned
221.
by CrLf 10y ago
I've been involved in a project where we used LuaJIT. At some point we discovered that a bug in our build process was making it pick up PUC Lua (from the system-installed packages) rather than LuaJIT (from the build process itself). Th
222.
by CrLf 10y ago
Maybe perhaps they should instead opt to lose these "others"? I'm unsure as to who the "jerks" really are in this situation.
223.
by CrLf 10y ago
Both C and COBOL are entrenched and (for very different reasons given their areas of applicability) are very difficult to displace. I don't disagree on this, it's an obvious fact. But COBOL alternatives won. Where COBOL used to ru
224.
by CrLf 10y ago
After a number of years using PowerShell, my conclusion is the opposite: text "scraping" is just better for most cases. Normal shell usage means doing a lot of one-shot pipelines incrementally. This is just easier and faster to do
225.
by CrLf 10y ago
You are missing my point by focusing on just half of it. I like C and know a few more people that like it too. I'd happily start new projects in C as long as they fit C's (traditional) use cases. I don't think anyone really
226.
by CrLf 10y ago
The best things always have detractors, yet they live on. C is over 40 years old and is still in widespread use today, even though there have been (supposedly) better languages targeting the same use cases for decades now. There is more to
227.
by CrLf 10y ago
systemd runs services in their own cgroup by default and gives you control over the resources alloted to those cgroups.
228.
by CrLf 10y ago
> I think config-mgmt tools can be extremely useful if your running a widely-ranged environment. But, you probably shouldn't be running a widely-ranged environment. If you keep things simple, and run as homogeneous as possible, you
229.
by CrLf 10y ago
Because 2015 was, like, 100 years ago...
230.
by CrLf 10y ago
I worry when I can't tell if a comment like this is based on fact or just trying to be funny. Because I've seen my share of nasty "legacy" automation but, surprisingly, I still think a good set of well thought-out shell
231.
by CrLf 10y ago
I don't think kernel development is any less scary now than it used to be. It's just as scary, people just don't care to know the gory details anymore. Such systems-level knowledge is seen as much less valuable now in the age
232.
by CrLf 10y ago
It seems that every systemd-related discussion is bound to be filled with all kinds of arguments, but completely devoid of discussion about the actual problem being solved. I can see how the "take no prisioners" attitude from syst
233.
by CrLf 10y ago
That's just it, isn't it? What makes it clearly superior? (BTW, I'm not arguing it isn't.) Linux supports quite a lot of different workloads on quite a lot of different hardware. Looking for the best possible performance
234.
by CrLf 10y ago
That's what people used to say about OS kernels, but Linux proved them wrong by evolving the most successful kernel on the planet by almost all measures.
235.
by CrLf 10y ago
You overestimate Linus' role in the process. The process is hierarchical and by the time patches reach Linus they're already bulk by the very definition of it. What leads to better security? Having an out-of-tree patch that few pe
236.
by CrLf 10y ago
If there's something that defines the Linux kernel development process is that large/wide changes are never accepted in bulk. Changes must be broken up into independent pieces that make sense by themselves and can be well understo
237.
by CrLf 10y ago
Whenever I read (or hear) about how grsecurity improves things I wonder why it isn't included in mainline, or why isn't it in the process of being included in mainline. This is, of course, a rethorical question that usually gets a
238.
by CrLf 10y ago
Windows 2003 is EOL because Microsoft wants to push customers to the latest version. Customers have been pushing back at this for a while now, but Microsoft (and other vendors) makes more money selling the new shiny than extending their pro
239.
by CrLf 10y ago
And one might argue they are taking the sane approach to the upgrade treadmill. It's easy to forget technology is supposed to solve real problems and that there's no economic incentive to use new toys to solve already solved probl
240.
by CrLf 11y ago
Also, it didn't really fix the drug abuse problem. It did help a lot with the social consequences of abuse by removing obstacles to seek help (or provide help).

More ›