jkrejcha

7 ms·

31.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
I've seen this sentiment a bit and while I don't dispute that you can get a better SBC for cheaper, there are still a lot of issues and it tends to be around software support primarily that allows it to occupy a very sweet spot. I
32.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
The main reason is that a lot of the reason comes around that it is incredibly difficult to do this in a general case just because of the grammar of SQL. Especially with the very different dialects, in the worst case you can get unintended
33.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
Iirc Cygwin used to use it but iirc they moved away from it because they said that it was pretty slow Though actually iirc werfault uses NtCreateUserProcess() to clone processes when writing out crash dumps to this day
34.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
> But how often would one actually need this? Well, the idea is that it'd probably be close to the default API for spawning processes (and could even be the bedrock for posix_spawn and friends in libc (and potentially even "sim
35.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
I kinda disagree, though I do see the usefulness here. While fork/exec can be useful in some cases, it'd be honestly pretty neat if the APIs took a pidfd argument (maybe with 0 meaning current process). Only program is setuid&#x2F
36.
by jkrejcha 4mo ago
Windows has had native support for always on top windows for over 25 years
37.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
I've mentioned this elsewhere in the thread, but I think it's a difference of view on what malloc represents. Operating systems do have "reserve this part of the address space" APIs and these reservations don't get
38.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
malloc can just return NULL (in specific, mmap returns -ENOMEM and your libc translates that). Applications need to check for success anyway
39.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
To be 100% fair, it's rare that processes are cloned on Windows, if only because it's part of the Native API that applications generally don't use directly, and CreateProcess is easier and does all the housekeeping stuff, etc
40.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
Windows doesn't use fork/exec for process creation in any relevant way today There are Native APIs for implementing fork (needed for the obsolete POSIX subsystem, primarily), but even on the Native API side, processes are usually
41.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
It has also created this unfortunate assumption a lot of the time that malloc and friends are (infallible OR crash) and, separately, can sometimes have potentially weird tendencies to force undefined behaviors on otherwise well-defined prog
42.
by jkrejcha 5mo ago
> These days you can do oom score adjusting, which is not as strong as a pardon. Writing -1000 to /proc/<pid>/oom_score_adj will cause the OOM killer not to consider the process at all :) From the man page proc_pid_o
43.
by jkrejcha 6mo ago
I'm not sure if it was what OP meant, but it's arguably a good availability technique (as long as you can generate the checksum, that is). Like, if I want to run custom firmware and flash it, having a checksum which verifies that
44.
by jkrejcha 6mo ago
"Unable to reproduce" is a fair enough explicit close reason. This is more about those "stale" bots that exist that just kinda close the issues because there hasn't been any response for X days. The annoyance with t
45.
by jkrejcha 6mo ago
Aside from the fact that you can do this statelessly (you could stuff a JWT or moral equivalent in the header as a Bearer token), if you were okay with server-side state, you can have the token be related to a principal or have permissions
46.
by jkrejcha 7mo ago
In general, I think it's because it tends to be an XY problem. If you're on a service account or something, you generally have SeBackupPrivilege (override read ACLs) and SeRestorePrivilege (override write ACLs) and other relevant
47.
by jkrejcha 7mo ago
I think the only thing that I find kinda strange about setuid/setgid is the fact that it is tied to an executable rather than as part of the executing principal. As an example of an OS that doesn't use a concept, Windows only rece
48.
by jkrejcha 7mo ago
> Now generate your random ID. Did you use a CSPRNG, or were your devs lazy and just used a PRNG? There's nothing about UUIDs that need to make them cryptographically secure. Many programming language libraries don't (and some
49.
by jkrejcha 8mo ago
> Does that mean that the admin will have to manage dob of every student when creating accounts ? That already happens to some extent although the mechanism by which this happens might depend on the school district, etc. The `dateOfBirth
50.
by jkrejcha 8mo ago
> 1. You can use UNC paths to access remote servers via SMB Relevant article from The Old New Thing: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20060509-30/?p=31... Programs (this is true for most mainstream op
51.
by jkrejcha 8mo ago
I'm not surprised; you need a lot more servers and even so, there are a lot of places where something low ping times is difficult. While there is a lot of room for latency to go down, 1 lightmillisecond is ~300 km (~186 mi). This means
52.
by jkrejcha 9mo ago
Others in this subthread discussed the comparison of the complexity of different ways of achieving flight itself, but I think there is an interesting discussion in that... well... we do add senses we don't technically need to achieve s
53.
by jkrejcha 9mo ago
Two spaces before the newline for a new line, two lines for a paragraph break
54.
by jkrejcha 10mo ago
A fun little tidbit, if you don't provide an init to the kernel command line, it'll try to look for them in a few places in this order: 1. /sbin/init 2. /etc/init 3. /bin/init 4. /bin/sh It
55.
by jkrejcha 10mo ago
> And that's not even getting in to the major breakages in point version upgrades or the whole python 2 to 3 language switch. Python doesn't use semver and never claimed to do so, but it's probably worth treating "x.y
56.
by jkrejcha 11mo ago
I think part of that thinking though is that if you do basic stuff like use a standard database engine or don't go too off the beaten path if that's what you need, it tends to be that you get the ultimately needed scale for basica
57.
by jkrejcha 11mo ago
> No mainstream implementation does that for memory unsafety due to the performance overhead It depends on what is considered memory safety here (especially when some of them are arguably unforced errors in the standards), but many imple
58.
by jkrejcha 11mo ago
> What I'm emphasizing is that code with safety violations, strictly speaking, isn't C/C++ at all. This isn't really correct and many programming language standards (including that of C and C++) don't support thi
59.
by jkrejcha 11mo ago
The problem is fundamentally the fact that it is a visual based system. It is generally faster to communicate orally and process communication aurally than by text message when the message is short enough and requires immediate attention. T
60.
by jkrejcha 1y ago
I think the main point here is that... well if you can help it, don't run untrusted software, since it's by definition not trusted. There are some times where you can't really get around it (JavaScript is an increasingly big

More ›