openSUSE, because of the snapshotting. It’s zero-setup and just gives peace of mind when doing upgrades, as I can roll back even from the bootloader.

I have no experience with this, but I figured a Rust library might have tried to solve it (static linking is very much the norm here) and I found that ash can statically link the “Vulkan loader”. I don’t know, what that actually means, for example whether it would still load libxcb at runtime. Might be worth looking into what they do…

See the “Optional linking” section here for their description: https://crates.io/crates/ash#optional-linking

It’s like a conspiracy theory for that guy. Everyone who tells them it’s not true that you can get rid of programmers, has to be a programmer, and therefore cannot be trusted.

Well, as the other person said, it was not a failing of LiMux. It was political. Munich had been ruled by one coalition throughout the lifetime of LiMux and after it went to a different coalition, they announced the switch back.
The manager of Munich’s IT department also publicly stated that they were surprised by the decision, because there are no larger technical problems and compatibility is resolved by providing virtualized MS Office, where necessary.
Coincidentally, Microsoft also moved its German headquarters from just outside of Munich’s tax region into Munich around the same time.

Good way to extort get Microsoft to offer competitive prices. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But yeah, it was the city of Munich that had a few goes at this. Now it’s the state of Schleswig-Holstein.

> C:\
> on linux

Absolutely illegal.

It is, yeah, but you can also use it to host a static webpage: https://codeberg.page/
Personally, I use it together with mdBook, so I write my texts in Markdown and then get a webpage with search and such. There’s lots of “static site generators” out there which do something similar.

It’s a little tech-y for what you’re hoping to do, but you could make use of the code tooling for collaboration. People could open issues, if they just want to make a suggestion, or they could create a pull request with a concrete change.

The thing is, everyone would agree that it’s a strength, if the Debian-specific format was provided in addition to a format which runs on all Linux distros. When I’m not on Debian, I just don’t get anything out of that…

Well, the thing is, if you’re developing a library, you usually do so, because you want it to be useful to people in the ecosystem.
By putting it under the GPL, you limit that usefulness to only those projects which are willing to also put themselves under the GPL. From an idealist point of view, I certainly also would like to say that people not willing to put their software under GPL don’t need to be my users. But from a library author point of view, I might as well not write a library then, since no one’s going to use it then.

Many open-source projects are under a permissive license themselves. I might disagree with their choice, but I don’t really want to exclude those from using my library. They’re still doing good things. I would love to exclude specifically any proprietary software from using my library, but that’s not really something you can require in your license without excluding all those permissive open-source projects.

So, to answer your question, I actually don’t think people are being tricked into it. I thought about choosing GPL for my libraries for a while (all my applications are under GPL) and decided against it. Which is a personal choice that others can disagree with, but all I’m saying is, I know what I’m doing, I wasn’t tricked to use a permissive license.

Same. I guess, this is the Starship thread now. My config:

I adapted it from the Gruvbox Rainbow theme.
I can post my config, if anyone wants specifically that. (It does kind of assume a light background, though.)

Yeah, not a lot of distros they could’ve based it on, which are less rooted in the EU. 🫠

GIMP is generally geared towards photo-editing, so if you have an existing image, you can use GIMP quite well to e.g. cut out parts of it or to apply effects.
It’s not really geared towards digital painting or creating new images from scratch, like Krita and presumably IbisPaint are.

Potentially both, but you don’t really have to ask to be hacked. Just put something into the public internet and automated scanning tools will start checking your service for popular vulnerabilities.

Worst part is when the un-refactored code continues to confuse other devs, meaning it keeps causing additional work, but you still don’t get time to actually fix it.

Sure. If I knew what the scope of this offer even was, I might have suggested doing that.

To be fair, the contract has a statement in there, that we don’t actually have to complete the features written down, we just need to put in the amount of work that this money pays for. The customer is more or less within our own company, so it’s not like anyone’s going to sue the other side anyways. But yeah, it still just feels weird to hear management talking about fictitious features for a random amount of money.

Sometimes, I am worried that if the customer is dissatisfied one day, that management will be angry at us for giving such a bad estimate, even though we didn’t. For example, as far as I’m aware, the current offer contains the complete list of features from a meeting where we explicitly brainstormed what would still be required. We did not discuss how much of that we could complete within the budget we’re given. But if I now notice that management is offering the whole list for far too little money, am I supposed to intervene or are we doing the bullshit charade again?

Last week, we sent out an offer for 102k and then the customer asked us, if we can please lower it to 99k, so they don’t have to go to their boss to get clearance.

Logically speaking, that is not how any of this works. It’s still going to need the same amount of budget to complete the task. But no one asked us devs how long it’ll take anyways, so I guess, that’s not my problem after all.

If you’d like something LaTeX-like (best for transscribing rather than composing), then there’s LilyPond.

It’s a different piece of software. It makes no sense for them to adopt the Firefox Terms of Use, no matter how they might think of them.

Yeah, that’s kind of my least favorite part about the existence of LLMs. Before, when someone wrote some code, there was a non-zero chance that they understood what they were doing and that the code is at least sane on a basic level. If they did some complex shit or even just wrote rather verbose code, you could be reasonably certain that they tried something simpler first.

Now, all of those assumptions are out the window. The biggest dumbass can generate code that looks alright at first glance and if you have to review it, you really don’t know how to interpret it or how much to explain when you find fairly obvious mistakes.

Here’s an example, I have looked up many times (like just now), which checks whether a string is empty:

var=""
if [ -z "$var" ]; then
    echo "empty"
else
    echo "not empty"
fi

Why -z? I have no idea. I will also routinely forget the ]; then part. I believe, if you write the then onto the next line, then you don’t need the semicolon. And then someone’s probably gonna tell me to use double-brackets [[ ]] instead, which probably does something.

Arguably, I never fully learned Bash syntax, but it also is just a stupid if-statement. There shouldn’t be that much complexity in it.