teacup50

86 ms·

931.
by teacup50 13y ago
Except for the part where launchd doesn't implement anything other than traditional process/service launch and termination, and doesn't violate the layering boundaries between system components. In a launchd system, there&#x2
932.
by teacup50 13y ago
Something other than your init system. Not even Apple's launchd has the kinds of idiotic layering violations that systemd is full of.
933.
by teacup50 13y ago
Except that sysv init, having tiny attack surface, very rarely needs updates.
934.
Deep iOS/Mac Crash Report Analysis(mikeash.com)
1 points by teacup50 13y ago|0 comments
935.
by teacup50 13y ago
You're right, I just run my own product company from my couch, and we'd never be daft enough to ship something critical right before disappearing into the ether.
936.
by teacup50 13y ago
> Git continues to surprise me with its code wrangling abilities. That's not a good thing. Perhaps it's not that people are "tripped up" by thinking in terms of SVN, but rather, are frustrated that things that shou
937.
by teacup50 13y ago
Or, you understand why git works the way it does, but since you don't work on the Linux kernel and don't consider your code ephemeral, you find git's tooling to be be incredibly frustrating and complex to use when all you wan
938.
by teacup50 13y ago
> 2) It has a free, optional hosted service that stores encrypted passwords with pure client-side decryption, so you can get your passwords from any web-enabled device without having to trust the host. This is an unbelievably audacious
939.
by teacup50 13y ago
Who ships a product release while in no position to monitor the results? Who ships a product release immediately after a commit?
940.
by teacup50 13y ago
Yeah, nobody knows what 'GTFO' means ...
941.
by teacup50 13y ago
This kind of "sense of humor" doesn't belong in a formal specification document. Sorry.
942.
by teacup50 13y ago
Shipping binary software for Linux is like playing a never-ending game of Space Invaders. GOG's position is totally understandable.
943.
by teacup50 13y ago
I have to agree with the peer poster. That thread only shows a level of attention to detail that is required when producing software that's intended to behave reliably. Bear in mind that drive-by patches have to be maintained forever b
944.
by teacup50 13y ago
> If Apple were to add dynamic libs, they would presumably be separate binary files, with their own signatures. No. That's not how it works on Mac OS X today, where bundled shared libraries are supported.
945.
by teacup50 13y ago
Did you even read the article? All of this is covered. The question of "what benefit would having a dynamically loaded library give you when each app runs sandboxed" seems to be answered in great detail under "Debugging Info
946.
by teacup50 13y ago
Except for all the issues that the article goes into great detail describing, and not without cost. CocoaPods is even mentioned in there, at the very end. Apple needs to fix this before they've shamelessly let it sit for an entire deca
947.
by teacup50 13y ago
Assuming that there really do still existing technical constraints, these aren't insurmountable problems. They're not even difficult problems. Apple has more than enough cash on hand to spend the engineering time necessary to solv
948.
by teacup50 13y ago
I really appreciate that Scala has a mature, rational, even-keeled community.
949.
by teacup50 13y ago
> On which OS is crossing the process boundary expensive? All of them, always. It's either expensive in terms of resource cost (requiring serialization and complex local IPC overhead), or expensive in terms of complexity (requirin
950.
by teacup50 13y ago
> I already mentioned child processes, which model scaling up to multiple servers better than threads do ... All taking away threads does is eliminate high-value optimization strategies that are available to multi-machine scalable syst
951.
by teacup50 13y ago
> Anyway, definitely a lesson in where we choose to direct the benefit of the doubt. In this case, the author of the PR was the one who deserved it, but wasn't the one who received it. "Benefit of the doubt" isn't s
952.
by teacup50 13y ago
The fact that you don't see Bryan Cantrill's public shaming as deliberately and extremely hostile is astounding . It was misleading, it was predicated on a straw man that wasn't remotely supported by the evidence, and it was