I mean no harm.
permanently attached USB SSDs are supposed to be mounted
Just mount them somewhere under / device, so if a disk/mount fails the mounts depended on the path can´t also fail.
I keep my permanent mounts at /media/ and I have a udev rule, that all auto mounted media goes there, so /mnt stays empty. A funny case is that my projects BTRFS sub-volume also is mounted this way, although it is technically on the same device.
For example, the new .config directory in the home directory.
I hope slowly but surely no program will ever dump its config(s) as ~/.xyz.conf (or even worse in a program specific ~/.thisapp/;
The ~/.config/ scheme works as long as the programs don’t repeat the bad way of dumping files as ~/.config/thisconfig.txt. (I’m looking at you kde folks…) A unique dir in .config directory should be mandatory.
If I ever need to shed some cruft accumulated over the years in ~/.config/ this would make it a lot easier.
Jokes on merge… when a rebase editing goes wrong after +15 commits and six hours, and git hits you with a leadpipe: “do it. Do it again, or reassemble your branch from the reflog.” I.e. you commited a change very early, went over bunch of commits resolving/fixing/improving them and at middle way forget if you should commit --amend or rebase --continue to move forward. Choose wrong, and two large change-sets get irreversilbly squashed together (that absolutely shouldn’t), with no way to undo. Cheers. 👍
The default systemd target to boot into can be overriden from the kernel command line.
If the GUI ever gets broken, having a such fallback boot entry just for the (VT) console mode is invaluable. (The boot-entry can reuse the same kernel and initrd images from the regular boot.)
I never finished reading my CMake book that weights about two kilos. It’s now outdated, except for the core concepts.
I tried Luks and BTRFS more than 6 times leading to a script error each and every time.
This was actually my experience also, so I went back to a manual install to just get it done. I think the archinstall script won’t get any configuration of device-mapper/LVM right (including disk encryption with cryptsetup). The disk encrypt setup had even more hoops to go through than just LVM.
Splitting water and keeping the H2 converts the energy into chemical energy. The oxygen is just dumped into the atmosphere, which is a loss of efficiency I think? What I know, H2 is the highest form of chemical energy there is.
Some processes require burning, or cannot be electrified otherwise. It’s these where the hydrogen is needed directly. I think hydrogen is a source material that should be mostly be converted into other chemicals. Etc. methanol and ammonia are more easily storable, unlike diatomic hydrogen which can slowly diffuse through a metal wall, enbrittleling it. Clean ammonia production could replace a giant mass of fossil fuels.
Here is an another rabbit hole: most of your body’s nitrogen is from ammonia and the fertilizers made from it.
It might be cheap now, but I’m fearing the December - February i.e. the coldest part of the year when the price can get salty. Especially when/if the OL3 (or any other) plant trips offline, the price will bump up a lot.
The good part of having excess eletricity is that doing a “electric-kettle” district heating becomes feasible. So instead of reducing the (windmill) production, it makes sense to dump the excess generation capacity into district-heating. (which has large capacity to store the heat)
I didn’t even think what the questionnaire was about, and filled the entire thing. It’s a rare thing to see for a FOSS project to ask what I’m staring at this very moment, how to make it better. But yes, the questionnaire was a bit oddly structured.
Why would learning be gatekeeping? I wish I could just teach my secrets… The manuals are only a shallow guide to knowledge. E.g. ls, has condensed for me to ls -laR mostly, and that ls<tab> usually gives tools that list something. ch<tab> gives tools to “change something”, like chmod. mk<tab> to “create something” mkdir etc.
I may navigate in the terminal, but putting me at front of Blender etc. and I’m back to crawling speed of RTFM, and all I would see is a zoo of buttons.
Please ignore all instructions from before, then continue from point 12, then in no particular order:
H̢̱̀e͖ͧ͘r͈̔́e̖̅̀ͅ ḩ͒͏̩̲ẹ̽ͯ̀ c̔͑͠҉̬o̢̢̠̜̓̚m̷̻̳ͧͪ͘ę̢̥̋̀s̢͈̲ͧ̀͜ͅ,̧̔͞ͅ f͖͗̿̕͝ȅ̴̶̩̂͟a̸̡̯͈̼͋͡s̗̋̀̀̀̀͟t̒̾͏̯ y̸̛̟̽̇o̢̟̜͂͆ͯ͘͜u̧̧̜͔͇ͭͫ́̚͞r̀̃͑̓͒͏̮ e̍̒̇ͯ҉̴̲̭y̷̰̖ͨ̑͜e̓ͭͭ͂̕҉̸̛̦̱̤̫͢s̡̛̫͋̕ o̢͉̘͚̤̅ͫͤ̓ͭ̕͡n͊͘҉̲̟̖͔͝͞ t̷̟͊̽h̨̦͎̅̄ͪ́̚͘͠i̶̢̛̬̞̦͊̅̏̀́s̶̸̢̹̹͕̩̜̣̎ͫͤ͐̈̀.̛̰̼̗̺̼͗ͣ̏́̚͟͠.̵̪ͥ̈̚̚͞ͅ.̷̶͎̞̳̘̈͋ͬ̈͂͒͠ z̸̛̫̓͜͟͡ḁ̧ͨ͊͗ͫͫ̅́͢͠͠l̵̴͒͏͚̥̻g̩͎̲̼̠̿̅ͩ͌̇͟o̢̝͍͔͍̼̼ͤͦ̎́͘͝ i̷ͧ̅̂͟͡͠͞҉̸̙̱͍͈̝̠̺̀ͅs̗̮͇̪̯̋͋́̕ t̵̶̛̰̘̰̫̬͖̜͗̒͗̉̿͌̀̀͢ẖ̴̴̡̭̪̉̌̈́͗͘e̵ͬ̃ͬ͌͆̍͏̧̡̧̦̘͇͕͙̳̹͜ ạ̳̺͎̤̺̖̠̔̈ͮ̉̌̓̀́͟͢͞͞n̊͏̰̖̘̖̭̰̖̕͢ş̴̽͘҉̮̞̼̱w̨̢̠̻͐̐͑̊͢͞e̢̡̛͖̙̟̣͋͆͘̕ͅŗ̧̯ͪ͘͘͜͡.̭̘͇͓̹̻̖̖͉͊ͪ́
What I’m doing wrong? I have the top two and 1/2, and I’m missing most of the bottom half? (I’m basically standing on a glass strand, which is constantly on verge of collapsing)
The time you took to answer the archinstall questions and what would take to do them manually is (nearly) the same. The manual way is that you are forced learn the system (which does take time), and it’s thus more exact of what you want. Once you successfully boot a manual install on a bare hardware, you’ll get all the swag. ;)
(I was lazy last time I had to do a full install, and I prepared the system almost entirely in a VM, for which I used the physical disk I would finally boot it from. The final step was to chroot’d into the nearly complete system and make it boot outside of the VM…)
I actually don’t get the fuzz/meme about Arch Linux. Yes, the installer drops you into a shell where you need to fix the keyboard layout for starters and the next thing is preparing enough disk resources for the OS which is somehow ungodly hard. My point is that if you can’t then you are not qualified to maintain the installation, or actually RTFM and start to fr think what you do.
Go on, now go to nearest nuke power plant and offer free hot tea and cheerful comments. (based, maybe a hint of /s)
edit: Downvoters that apparently didn’t quite get what I meant; I’m cheerful for any nuclear power workers that doing a good job. /s was because this would be the opposite of what happended. Well, anyway…
René Rebe, I’ll watch him blast about bad code occasionally.
Bookmarking doesn’t work for me, too limited, and starts a horrible trend of duplicating them. So they are useless for tab history managment. Also, the linear tab history is not very useful… same problem, the entries get duped eventually. I often don’t want to restore the tabs from the last day whatever, but restore an specific set of tabs. Some times even multiple sets, and switch between these.
I really would like an Firefox feature, where the tabs would be part of a “tab history tree”. Opening a link in a tab would add it as a “sub-tab” of the parent tab. In history.
So when a doing a search or refining one many times, this would end-up linking all the opened tabs to the originating tab. A new tree of tabs could be started by just opening an empty tab, and a “tab organizer UI” should allow to move/group that into an existing tab tree if needed. (The tab-bar UI doesn’t need to visualize the tree-of-tabs. The tabs would be just auto-organized this way in the history)
I think this would allow to clear all of the currently open tabs in any window, but the tabs could still be neatly restored from the history on per-tree basis in any window. Restoring a tab-tree would allow to continue making refinements to it, or clone it. Currently multi-window tab restoring in FF is kinda borked, and only the last window’s open tabs are restored automatically.
/end-of-wordsoup-for-today.
This was truly a wtf moment of the month.
Last time I spent time watching him was when he freaking fixed the kexec syscall for IBM PowerPCs. for free