The biggest drawback of not providing any SSDs even as a fallback is obviously… what if the app just doesn’t draw CSDs?
Wayland requires apps to be able to draw CSDs, so that’s just a broken app. SSDs are optional extension. So the app should either use X11 (and rely on Xwayland to provide the decorations), or implement Wayland properly.
Charles university uses and develops something called ReCodex, and it is available on GitHub. As a student, it was very nice to use.
In fact, I think you’d be better off writing a deep dive into what/how environment variables work at build time, and also invoking commands on the CLI.
But LD_PRELOAD doesn’t really have much to do with build time behavior (unless you’re talking about replacing parts of the compiler) - it allows you to force a shared library to be loaded with higher priority than anything else, so it overrides symbols from other libraries.
It is recognized and used by Linux’s dynamic linker, which is run-time, not build-time.
Yes, the DE-specific implementations is pointless (as far as I know, I use a WM), but the XDG implementation is actually used first, and the function returns true if any impl returns true, like
xdg() || gnome() || gnome_old() || kde().
True, I must’ve read the code wrong when making the comment.
This isn’t that bad?
Yes, which is why I take issue with a PR (or rather what should have been a PR) that introduces crap code with clearly visible low effort improvements - the submitter should’ve already done that so the project doesn’t unnecessarily gain technical debt by accepting the change.
With multiple impls, you have to resolve conflicts somehow.
Yep, that’s why I think it’s important for the implementations to actually differentiate between light and fail state - that’s the smallest change and allows you to keep the whole detection logic in the individual implementations. Combine that with XDG being the default/first one and you get something reasonable (in a world where the separate implementations are necessary). You do mention this, but I feel like the whole two paragraphs are just expanding on this idea.
But it’s better to criticize the code’s actual faults (…)
I made a mistake with the order in which the implementations are called, but I consider the rest of the comment to still stand and the criticisms to be valid.
Well, the detection is broken for KDE and backwards in the XDG implementation (which is also only used as a fallback when the three DE-specific implementations fail, even though all of them actually support XDG so having separate implementations is pointless).
Also with the way it’s implemented, it will have unexpected results for users who have both KDE and Gnome installed (or at least have leftover configuration files) - if you for example used KDE in the past with a theme considered to be “dark” by this and now use Gnome and have it set to light mode, you will get dark mode GZdoom with no obvious reason why.
Oh and the XDG implementation is also very fragile and will not work on everyone’s system because it depends on a specific terminal utility being installed. The proper way would be to use a DBus library and get the settings through that.
And when somebody comes to fix it, they will have to figure out a) what’s so special about the DE-specific implementations that XDG wasn’t enough (they might just assume that XDG isn’t supported widely enough), b) learn how to detect dark theme properly on the DE they’re fixing, c) rework the code so that there is a difference between “this DE wants light mode” and “couldn’t figure out of this DE is in light or dark mode” - both of these are now represented by the “false” return value.
I don’t think a well written and functioning code made with AI assistance would get a response this strong, but the problem here is that the code is objectively bad and its (co-)author kept doubling down about something they probably barely even checked.
Don’t know about the UK, but in central Europe it’s common for houses to get three phase power that can then be used on 400V three phase circuits and gets split (ideally evenly) into 240V circuits. And the fact that the phases have effectively zero coupling means that you also need to just try the adapter to find out if it’s going to work or not unless you happen to know how exactly your house is wired up, just like with split phase power.
Apartments usually get a single phase though, but IMHO it’s also less likely that WiFi won’t be enough there, so it’s questionable if that’s even a point for powerline.
You don’t need any swap space for suspend to work
The download will simply fail if the version pacman wants to download isn’t available on the mirror. The version is part of the download URL.
Wayland does force clients to be able to cope with a compositor that doesn’t do SSD - CSD support is mandatory, SSD optional.
It’s a crappy clickbait title, I don’t see why it shouldn’t get downvoted
I guess how much people care also depends on whether they tend to use laptops in ways and places that are prone to causing damage to the ports. I’ve never damaged any port on any laptop I’ve ever owned, and it’s unlikely I ever will because I like to keep the cables organized and out of the way (so it would require conscious effort to tug on them), and when I want to pick my laptop up, I always quickly run my hand around its perimeter to make sure everything is disconnected.
I do not claim that this is the correct way to use a laptop or that others should do the same, it is a tool that should be used the way its user needs, I just want to point out that for some usecases, this is simply a non-issue in the same way a non-replaceable CPU is - nothing’s going to happen to it.
Also, my current laptop does have both a barrel jack (probably works, I’ve never used it) and a USB-C charging connector, so it’s not necessarily an either-or proposition.
deleted by creator
Hey, just a tiny note: static and dynamic addresses aren’t mutually exclusive. You can let SLAAC do its thing AND also set a static address on your server. Remember, IPv6 works best when you aren’t afraid of adding more addresses.
deleted by creator
it’s incorrect bc it destroys multibyte characters
It doesn’t. As the poster two levels up said, all bytes that don’t represent an ASCII character have the high bit set, even the follow-up bytes in multibyte sequences. So the condition b >= 32 will match and preserve them.
Maybe htop? It’s pretty configurable and has decent bars for various resources.
Also if your reason for choosing pure TUI is just resource usage (and not the aesthetics of it / cool feeling / whatever else), then you could maybe look into running something like Sway or Xorg+i3 - those are very lightweight, well suited for single window usage, and open up a lot of possibilities for lightweight GUI apps.
The “correct” way to handle “static” addresses with dynamic prefix is using tokenized network interfaces (which is pretty much just the lower 64 bits of the IPv6 address). That will then be used for SLAAC in addition to the randomly generated address. The support for dynamic prefixes in firewalls on Linux and Mikrotik is however still pretty dire (obviously, as it’s not an enterprise feature). No clue about BSDs/pfSense
The question asks for “the best” way to do it (making it opinion based) and forbids a potential solution without explaining why (it’s clearly some kind of assignment, but that doesn’t matter here). And it has plenty of answers both using Boost and in pure C++, so I’m not sure why that wasn’t enough for you. Just because it’s closed doesn’t mean the answers already provided are bad.
Maybe a good option for projects that you don’t want anyone else to contribute to, but then why make them open source in the first place?
Because, at least to some people, open source is more about user freedom (to modify the software and share the modifications with anyone they wish) and less about collaboration.
For example every time I publish some simple utility that I wrote for myself and decided could be useful for other people, I release it under a reasonable open source license and pretty much forget about it - I’m not going to be accepting merge requests, I don’t have time to maintain random tiny projects. If I ever need to use the utility for something it doesn’t quite do, I’ll check if any of the forks seem to have implemented it. If not, I’ll just implement it in my repo.
The reason I’m publishing the code is because I know how much it sucks when you find some proprietary freeware utility that almost does what you need, but you can’t fix it for your usecase on account of it being proprietary for no reason (well, author’s choice is the reason, and I respect it, but it’s still annoying)
People might also assume that the quote in the post is from the article, and not just your rant