KindaABigDyl

joined 3 years ago
[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I believe I even got the reverse, pacman working on Nix (I've also gotten it and archiso working on Fedora)

I think this is more idiomatic:

let result = foo(a, b)
    .map_err(|e| MyErrorEnum::Error(e.to_string()));
[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 32 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

FreeBSD is not Linux, it is Unix.

See the "BSD?" That stands for "Berkley Software Distribution" which was the Unix that was used at UC Berkley back in the day. It uses a Unix kernel not the Linux kernel.

There is certainly overlap between the worlds of modern Unix and Linux, since much of the Unix world benefits from the popularity of Linux and FOSS as a whole, but it still is its own thing.

Namely, the biggest difference is that FreeBSD is a complete OS. All components other than a user's personally installed apps are made by (or at least integrated and maintained by) the FreeBSD team itself. Linux is technically just a kernel, and a Linux distribution, while similar to a Unix distribution, is made up of many many many moving parts made by lots of different people, each piece with its own goals then steered into working together.

Now, there are some exceptions. There is a bit of a blur now. These days, the BSDs have more 3rd-party parts and the Linux world has become more governed and polished, but they are ultimately different things with different goals.

There are plenty of other BSD descendents including OpenBSD and to a lesser extent Darwin (aka the macOS core, which runs an XNU kernel based on the Mach microkernel with a BSD subsystem beside it)

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 5 points 3 weeks ago

I always use Breeze Dark (even tho I don't use Plasma)

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The future of AI in Ubuntu [Except it's Internet and Slackware in 1996 instead of AI and Ubuntu in 2026]

As 1996 progresses, internet-based tools are becoming more and more ubiquitous. Adoption across the tech industry has been mixed, both in terms of which projects are embracing "Web" technologies, and in how companies are structuring their adoption. As a result, I'm frequently asked about what Slackware will do (or not) to incorporate networks.

In this post I'll detail how the internet will play a part in Slackware's future, my framework for classifying internet features in the OS, and how Slackware is currently approaching adoption internally, because I think that will help paint a picture of our intent.

The bottom line is that Slackware is ramping up its use of Internet tools in a focused and principled manner that favours open network tools with license terms that feel most compatible with our values, combined with open source contracts. Internet features will be landing in Slackware throughout the next year as we feel that they're of sufficient maturity and quality, with a bias towards private networks by default.

Internet features in Slackware will come in two forms: first as a means of enhancing existing OS functionality with networking in the background, and latterly in the form of "Internet native" features and workflows for those who want them.

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I tried it. No it doesn't. Quit lying just bc you don't like Brave

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev -2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

No Vivaldi's and the others' don't work for YouTube

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

I don't use the crypto. You can just disable the wallet when you set up the appearance.

 

Not sure if this is a good place to ask for help, but I have scoured the internet and no one has a solution, so hopefully this question helps me as well as others.

I'm trying to get my computer to run at its best when on Hyprland. I have an MSI Raider GE76 which has an Nvidia GTX 3080 Mobile and an Intel Tiger Lake CPU with integrated graphics.

I typically have an external display over display port, an Ultrawide 3440x1440@60Hz, and the internal laptop display is on eDP at 1920x1080@360Hz. Note tho that while I often have the dual screen setup, I do need to be able to go to just the Intel display. The Nvidia GPU drives all outputs (DP, HDMI, Thunderbolt) EXCEPT for the eDP which is connected to the Intel card.

On X11, I could use reverse prime sync to use the Nvidia card for everything and just have the Intel card draw whatever the Nvidia card renders. This worked well. Unfortunately there isn't anything like that for Wayland, and I don't have a hardware switch to put the eDP on the nvidia side of things.

This means that I have to use the default prime modes to run stuff on the nvidia card which makes the second screen incredibly laggy. Now, I can disable the i915 module and the external display becomes buttery smooth, but I can't use my built-in display (which means I also can't use the display when I'm not connected to the external monitor).

How can I get both to work well on Wayland?

Can I run the external display exclusively on Nvidia and the internal on Intel with Prime? That could work, but idk if that's possible.

What's the optimal way to set up an external display on Wayland with and Nvidia hybrid-graphics laptop? Bc right now I'm thinking of just going back to X11 and praying it gets enough support to live until I can get a decent Wayland config.

 

I created a little side project over the past few days, a new build system for C and C++: https://github.com/blueOkiris/acbs/

I've seen a lot of discourse over C build tools. None of them really seem solid except for (some) Makefiles (some Makefiles are atrocious; you just can't rely on people these days). Bazel, cmake - they're just not straight forward like a clean Makefile is, basically black magic, but setting up a Makefile from scratch is a skill. Many copy the same one over each time. Wouldn't it be nice if that Makefile didn't even need to be copied over?

Building C should be straight forward. Grab the C files and headers I want, set some flags, include some libraries, build, link. Instead project build systems are way way way overcomplicated! Like have you ever tried building any of Google's C projects? Nearly impossible to figure out and integrate with projects.

So I've designed a simplistic build system for C (also C++) that is basically set up to work like a normal Makefile with gcc but where you don't have to set it up each time. The only thing you are required to provide is the name of the binary (although you can override defaults for your project, and yes, not just binaries are possible but libs as well). It also includes things like delta building without needing to configure.

Now there is one thing I haven't added yet - parallel building. It should be as simple as adding separate threads when building files (right now it's a for loop). I know that's something a lot of people will care about, but it's not there yet. It's also really intended to only work with Linux rn, but it could probably pretty easily be adjusted to work with Windows.

Lay your project out like the minimal example, adjust the project layout, and get building! The project itself is actually bootstrapped and built using whatever the latest release is, so it's its own example haha.

It's dead simple and obvious to the point I would claim that if your project can't work with this, your project is wrong and grossly over-complicated in its design, and you should rework the build system. C is simple, and so should the build system you use with it!

So yeah. Check it out when y'all get a chance

 

I created a little side project over the past few days, a new build system for C and C++: https://github.com/blueOkiris/acbs/

I've seen a lot of discourse over C build tools. None of them really seem solid except for (some) Makefiles (some Makefiles are atrocious; you just can't rely on people these days). Bazel, cmake - they're just not straight forward like a clean Makefile is, basically black magic, but setting up a Makefile from scratch is a skill. Many copy the same one over each time. Wouldn't it be nice if that Makefile didn't even need to be copied over?

Building C should be straight forward. Grab the C files and headers I want, set some flags, include some libraries, build, link. Instead project build systems are way way way overcomplicated! Like have you ever tried building any of Google's C projects? Nearly impossible to figure out and integrate with projects.

So I've designed a simplistic build system for C (also C++) that is basically set up to work like a normal Makefile with gcc but where you don't have to set it up each time. The only thing you are required to provide is the name of the binary (although you can override defaults for your project, and yes, not just binaries are possible but libs as well). It also includes things like delta building without needing to configure.

Now there is one thing I haven't added yet - parallel building. It should be as simple as adding separate threads when building files (right now it's a for loop). I know that's something a lot of people will care about, but it's not there yet. It's also really intended to only work with Linux rn, but it could probably pretty easily be adjusted to work with Windows.

Lay your project out like the minimal example, adjust the project layout, and get building! The project itself is actually bootstrapped and built using whatever the latest release is, so it's its own example haha.

It's dead simple and obvious to the point I would claim that if your project can't work with this, your project is wrong and grossly over-complicated in its design, and you should rework the build system. C is simple, and so should the build system you use with it!

So yeah. Check it out when y'all get a chance

 
 
view more: next ›