chousuke

73 ms·

601.
by chousuke 11y ago
Is it even possible to guarantee that you won't lose commits with postgresql replication? For many applications, consistency is more important than not losing any data ever. For the other kind of application, you'll need something
602.
by chousuke 11y ago
Memorization is definitely useful for programmers. It means you will spend less time browsing API documentation looking up existing functions applicable to your particular problem. If you program a lot in a particular language or API, a lit
603.
by chousuke 11y ago
Honestly, I don't think that argument holds much water. Init systems are not "just shell". If you go and try to write a sysv init script with only shell skills, chances are your init script will be broken in some obscure way.
604.
by chousuke 11y ago
It's perfectly possible to run scripts with systemd unit files, so there's no real "flexibility" lost anywhere. The primary improvement is that systemd handles by default most of what used to be boiler-plate in every scr
605.
by chousuke 11y ago
I'm not sure if this is POSIX, but if you program accepts positional arguments, in bash you can do eg.: diff <(somecommand) <(someothercommand) and the shell will replace these with /dev/fd/<n>, allow
606.
by chousuke 11y ago
It may be an issue of terminology. I personally think git is simple. That doesn't mean it's easy . The issues listed in the GP comment seem to me mostly social. I think the most common problems with git stem from a more general d
607.
by chousuke 11y ago
The essay seems to encourage the realisation that nothing really special is happening under the hood, which in my view is important for people who are learning to use git. For six hundred words, I think it does a good job.
608.
by chousuke 11y ago
If you only have 100% logic bugs in your code, I'd say the code is in damn good shape. That means all your bugs are "meaningful". Different programming platforms have different "incidental complexity" causing bugs n
609.
by chousuke 11y ago
Not quite ELI5, but Haskell tries to make IO pure by essentially representing all side-effecting programs as data and separating evaluation from execution. If you say, for example: x = print "Foo" then the value of x is a p
610.
by chousuke 11y ago
Hmm, this sounds like a difference in expectations. I don't think anyone said that Debian upgrades are fully automated; the package manager does what it can (and it usually does a good job) but it's always the sysadmin's jo
611.
by chousuke 11y ago
Am I understanding this correctly: instead of having the boot partitions configured as a (MD?) RAID set, you had somehow manually cloned them between two disks? A mirrored boot partition works just fine if you're legacy booting... With
612.
by chousuke 11y ago
"Either" actually isn't a Functor, at least in Haskell In Haskell, a Functor actually consists of two parts: The type itself (f), which 'transforms' a type a into type "f a". ie. Maybe "applied"
613.
by chousuke 12y ago
Outside of a development environment, you'd run that ./configure && make install step on a build slave that creates a nice RPM or Debian package of it for you which you can install without fear that the build scripts insta
614.
by chousuke 12y ago
I think you'd generally want the host not to do write caching anyway unless you can afford to corrupt VM disks in case of host power failure. I suppose a hardware battery-backed write cache might still be safe for live migrations.
615.
by chousuke 12y ago
"Lack of consistency" here doesn't have to imply lack of atomicity; In the case of your example, an eventually consistent system could return either the old address or the new address at some point in time X, but never a mixt
616.
by chousuke 12y ago
I may just be rehashing sibling arguments here, but to me that particular API looks very much what I think an SQL-wrapping library ought to be: a replacement for string concatenation and something that allows you to treat SQL queries as dat
617.
by chousuke 12y ago
That's the thing. I haven't seen anything, because the documentation doesn't mention it. You might be entirely justified, but I can't tell because neither you or the documentation elaborate on any of my questions. gitles
618.
by chousuke 12y ago
I don't think you're seeing my point. The documentation doesn't do anything to convince the reader that gitless' UI is more consistent than git's. Let's pretend I'm a newbie. All I see in the documentation
619.
by chousuke 12y ago
I read the page, but it's just a short introduction to some of the commands in gitless; and they're not at all different from git in concept either, except for the hiding of the index. It does nothing to answer "why" git
620.
by chousuke 12y ago
This seems blog fails to convey the why of gitless. It looks like a very thin veneer that's trying to hide the index, which I think is a really bad idea. The index is one of the two main reasons I prefer git over mercurial. The first p
621.
by chousuke 12y ago
I used to use Gnome for the same reason; Everything just about works correctly out of the box. It's really quite a good system. Then I got really fed up with always messing up my terminals and switched to awesome as my window manager.
622.
by chousuke 12y ago
Your second statement misses the point. Your process supervisor can be ultimately stable and never crash, but if it does crash, it's just as fatal as init crashing. systemd PID 1 won't be rendered prone to crashing just because it
623.
by chousuke 12y ago
It's not really "automagical"; it's all quite well defined. Honestly, I'll take a dozen 5-line unit files over a single "portable" init script that implements its own utility library, or yet another "
624.
by chousuke 12y ago
Okay. So, init starts the process supervisor. Then, the process supervisor starts everything else. Then all of a sudden, something goes wrong and the process supervisor crashes. Init then inherits all the children, and has no clue what&#x27
625.
by chousuke 12y ago
I don't see your point. In every case where you depend on filenames to identify blobs of data, case-sensitivity (actually byte-sensitivity) is the only behaviour that a filesystem can reliably implement. Once you allow cases where two
626.
by chousuke 12y ago
Git's storage model is such that every commit is physically a snapshot of the entire work tree. Git makes this efficient with delta compression (essentially, deduplication) which is extremely efficient for text (in fact an entire git
627.
by chousuke 12y ago
"Engineering for adoption", as you said, is necessary for something attempting to replace something as key as the init system and other core components. With software like this, whatever the replacement, if it doesn't have
628.
by chousuke 12y ago
That's a proposal. And it's not like Lennart was being somehow subversive. He explicitly states the following: > systemd is Linux-only. That means if we still care for those non-Linux > platforms replacements have to be writ
629.
by chousuke 12y ago
The real option actually is to bring up FreeBSD to the level that it can provide the same functionality (specifically, dbus interfaces) as systemd and Linux. Gnome depends on systemd features because they're useful and solve real pro
630.
by chousuke 12y ago
You're blaming the wrong party here. The systemd project has no control over what Gnome relies on. They independently rely on systemd because it provides functionality that makes their lives easier, and it's their right to do that

More ›