trevor (he/they)

Extensions. Epiphany can’t run Firefox and Chromium extensions, but Orion mostly can. I can’t live without uBlock Origin or autofill from my password manager, and Orion is the only niche browser I know of that can.

This is the first post here that I don’t understand. Is this supposed to be Taylor Swift and a photoshop of Greta Thunberg’s head?

What’s the context for this?

All conservatives are pedophiles.

Helix is my favorite editor. It’s like Vim, but less obtuse because you can see the text you’re about to perform an action on before you take it.

This is a bit pendantic, but GitHub’s TOS allows users to fork your public repositories, regardless of its license.

You couldn’t modify the new code under the dipshit license, but you can do whatever you want to the slightly older code under the good license.

This is perfect! Thanks!

Thanks for asking. It’s partly OOP, but more than that, C++ is just rife with footguns and is basically unreadable for me.

I think C is much more readable and I find imperative/procedural programming to be much more delightful and readable.

Rust is my absolute favorite though, because it removes the footguns of most lower-level langs while being just as performant. The only trade-off is that you need to understand the borrow checker, but working with it becomes substantially easier over time and saves an ungodly amount of headaches. You can also write something that very closely approximates OOP, without the most of the footguns (like inheritance, until you get into more advanced stuff like trait objects, anyway).

I don’t know of anything fully libre exists, so in lieu of that: TD Ameritrade was the only software I found that actually has a Linux client. I’m pretty sure it’s still proprietary, but idk of anything else.

Speaking of suckless, does anyone know of a Wayland-compatible window manager, similar to DWM, preferably written in Rust or C (but not C++).

Seems like a fun thing to tinker with to learn how window managers work.

Yes, but don’t mention it to the people that only care about their eye candy because they get very mad when you do that.

Edit: as predicted, the chuds are assmad.

The EU governing bodies are speaking out of both sides of their mouths if they claim that they want data sovereignty while simultaneously relying on an evil, American company to verify your “integrity” 🤡

You’ll never be sovereign if you rely on a for-profit entity that makes money by spying on people and selling your data.

I have the same mouse, and that scroll wheel is unusable. It requires a ton of effort to just scroll tiny amounts because the sensitivity is waaay too low and it cannot be adjusted. The rest of the mouse is really nice because it runs QMK.

I set up drag scrolling as a workaround for the shitty scroll wheel, which allows you to press a button (or a combination of buttons) and then use the mouse’s optical sensor as an omnidirectional scrolling device until you release the button.

I set that up on my Ploopy Adept hand trackball mouse as well. It’s my favorite mouse I’ve ever used.

The trusted publishing is really cool, but all I want is the ability to publish crates without needing to link an OIDC account (like GitHub). I have so many crates that I don’t publish because I hate mixing accounts/identities like that.

I posted this in another thread, but reposting here because a lot of people, including myself up until very recently, were under that impression:

I’ve packaged a CLI that I made as a flatpak. It works just fine. Nothing weird was required to make it work.

The only thing is that if you want to use a CLI flatpak, you probably want to set an alias in your shell to make running it easier.

I’m not sure why more CLIs aren’t offered as flatpaks. Maybe because static linking them is so easy? I know people focus on flatpak sandboxing as a primary benefit, but I can’t help but think that if static linking was easier for bigger applications, it wouldn’t be needed as much.

I’ve packaged a CLI that I made as a flatpak. It works just fine. Nothing weird was required to make it work.

The only thing is that if you want to use a CLI flatpak, you probably want to set an alias in your shell to make running it easier.

I’m not sure why more CLIs aren’t offered as flatpaks. Maybe because static linking them is so easy? I know people focus on flatpak sandboxing as a primary benefit, but I can’t help but think of static linking was easier for bigger applications, it wouldn’t be needed as much.

I’m not quite sure why you think pointing out someone’s confidently incorrect claim that containers do give you reproducible environments means that I fetishsize anything?

But if you genuinely want to know why reproducibility is valuable, take a look at https://reproducible-builds.org/.

I was quite happy to see that Debian and Arch have both made great strides into making tooling that enables reproducible packages in recent times. It’s probable that, because of efforts like this, creating reproducible builds will become easier/possible on most Linux environments, including traditional container workflows.

For now though, Nix Flakes are much better at enabling reproducible builds of your software than traditional containers, if you can suffer through Nix not being documented very well. This article covers some more details on different build systems and compares them with Nix Flakes if you want more concrete examples.

FWIW, I think that containers are awesome, and using them for dev environments and CI tooling solves a lot of very real problems (“it works on my machine”, cheap and easy cross-compilation for Linux systems, basic sandboxing, etc.) for people. I use containers for a lot of those reasons. But if I need to make something reproducible, there are better tools for the job.

🤡

So, containers do not get you reproducibility.

For dev environments, repeatable is okay. If you want actually reproducible binaries that you can ship, Nix is better fit for that purpose.

Care to elaborate? Containers give you repeatable environments, which are not the same thing as reproducible environments.

Okay, so this definitely feels like bad practice to not change the version number or URL, even in something trivial like example texts here. But what real-world significance does this have?

It almost seems equivalent to just changing a variable name based on how it’s being used, which – to be clear – should come with a version bump, but I can’t imagine this having any meaningful impact anywhere.