“Clean” Code, Horrible Performance offers a good argument against it purely from a performance stand point. Well worth a watch. But it also does not even make code easier to maintain. It just smears logic all over the place and makes it harder to understand what is going on. Trying to follow clean code principals just makes your code worse. And if you try to point that out to anyone they just say you are doing it wrong with no proper advice on how to actually improve things.

Are you running low on memory? The system can appear to freeze when it runs low on memory as the kernel tries very hard to swap pages between ram and swap constantly.

I am surprised it took them so long. It would have been the first thing to do, block new users, stop people takeong over orphaned packages or make the whole AUR read only for a while. Any of those would have disrupted this attack and gave the devs more time to figure out a longer term solution.

Because that is not an escape sequence. Not sure there is any valid escape sequence. If you put any non space character on the line it will show the ticks in the block:

-```
```\
M  ```
```♪
```     a

Though looks like you can use more ticks on the opening block and the end will need to match that number:

````
```
```
````

Still more helpful then this error I have seen before:

error: Success

My favourite: The code does not work. You make a change, it breaks more. You undo that mistake: it now works.

No. But only because I switched to helix. I have used vim for a lone time before that. Only having vim on a system is fine. Far worse is only having vi. Which is almost like vim but missing a lot of useful things.

You shouldn’t need tooling to fix an issue. Better for a design that does not require extra tooling.

Free-market capitalist thing would be to do whatever the hell you want to make as much money as you can. That’s what you get when there is no regulations on the market to discourage bad behavior for competition, the consumer or environment.

“We also heard from attendees that the industry, which is perceived as struggling, would have difficulty selling games for $80 if GTA 6 came out at $70. We think it’s in Take-Two’s self-interest, as a publisher and partner to many developers, to raise the price point for the entire industry.”

That sounds a lot like an argument a cartel would make.

has around 69 different file-systems

VFS maintainers decided it’s time to lay out documentation with more clear-cut guidelines for getting new file-systems upstreamed.

Not really the same situation as that xkcd. They are not creating a new fs.

You can just use the filesystem and markdown files. That is a common way for applications to store note type data locally. This is what tools like Obsidian do and has the advantage of being easy to get the notes out if you want to use a different tool.

I have switched to using helix, so no matter which distro I am on I need to change it to be my default by setting the EDITOR env var.

Depends on which classification system you use. Botaically it is a fruit. But culinarily it is a vegetable.

Yeah… Ubuntu packages are never up to date on release date. They freeze them months before so they can iron out any bugs with the versions they picked. You don’t pick Ubuntu or any point release distro to get up to date packages.

If you can drop a .env file on a server. You can drop a well formed .ini file instead. I don’t see any reason to ever parse a env file as a ini file.

LSF is not a distro. It is a instruction manual and teaching aid. Don’t use it as a base for you main OS. And IMO Gentoo does not really teach you more then Arch does. It gives a bit of flexibility that not many care about (how things are compiled) at a very big cost (of having to compile everything yourself). I would not use either unless compiling things is your hobby.

Sure, try them in a VM if you really want to. But I would not really consider that moving on from your current distro nor do you really need to do that.

GTK does not mean libadwaita. That is a addition on top of GTK. Many of the GTK programs and environments don’t use libadwaita. It is mostly only the GNOME stuff that does.

From anyone that has the pkgstat package installed:

https://pkgstats.archlinux.de/fun/Desktop Environments/current

Debian has two main versions, stable - which is released every two years and supported for a long time. And unstable which is basically a rolling release and constantly changes adopting things to test them before the next stable release. There is also testing, but that is just to place thing in before promoting them to stable so has the same release cadence as stable.

Two years of fixed versions on a desktop is a very long time to be stuck on some packages - epically ones you use regularly. Most people want to use things that are newer then that, either new applications released or new features for apps they use in the past two years.

Ubuntu also has two release versions (that not really the right term though). They have a LTS version which is released every two years much like Debian is. But they also have a interim release that is released every 6 months. This gives users access to a lot newer versions of software and stuff that has been released more recently. Note that the LTS versions are just the same as the interim versions, its just that LTS versions are supported for a longer period of time, so you can use it for longer.

For the Ubuntu releases they basically take a snapshot of the Debian unstable version, and from that point on they maintain their own security patches for the versions they picked. They can share some of this work with Debians patches and backports, but since Debian stable and Ubuntu are based off different versions Ubuntu still needs to do a lot of work with figuring out which ones they need to apply to their stuff as well as ensuring things work on the versions they picked. Both distros do a lot of work in this regard and do work with each other where it makes sense.

Ubuntu also adds a few things on top of Debian. Some extra packages, does a few things that make the disto a bit more user friendly etc.

Any other distro that wants to base off one of these has to make the choice

• Do they want a very slow release cadence matching Debian (or Ubuntu LTS).
• Or do they want a faster release cadence of Ubuntu without doing much extra work as they can build off the work that Ubuntu is doing on top of Debian.
• Or do they want to take on all that extra work themselves and have more control over the versions included in their repos.

For a lot of distro maintainers basing off Ubuntu gives them a newer set of packages to work with while doing a lot less work doing all that work themselves. Then they can focus on the value adds they want to add ontop of the distro rather then redoing the work Ubuntu already does or sticking with much older versions.

The value add work that needs to be done on either base I dont think is hugely different. You can take the core packages you want and change a few settings, or remake a few meta packages that you dont want from Ubuntu. This is really all stuff you will be doing which ever one you pick. It is a lot more work keeping up with security patching everything.