me : *joblessly running `uptime` on a server*
*for no reason* : runs `uptime --pretty`
interesting output...

*thinks to self* : didn't we create that program few years ago that computed a similar output? Wonder if the code is similar...

*brain gets excited about the source code of `uptime`*

goes hunting for the source code of `uptime`... finds it... ( wasn't too hard anyway )

now here I am comparing my code with the source code of `uptime`

what a way to end the day... 🤦‍ FML!

> Fortunately, I did finally find the change, in a compressed mailbox file from 1993 on oldlinux.org.

<hyperlink:oldlinux.org>oldlinux.org/Linux.old/mail-ar</hyperlink>

Show thread

> My search was starting to feel cursed. Thankfully, I found some older linux-devel mailing list archives, rescued from server backups, often stored as tarballs of digests. I searched over 6,000 digests containing over 98,000 emails, 30,000 of which were from 1993. But it was somehow missing from all of them. It really looked as if the original patch description might be lost forever, and the "why" would remain a mystery.

Show thread

> Trying to discover, at least, when this change occurred, I searched tarballs on kernel.org and found that it had changed by 0.99.15, and not by 0.99.13 – however, the tarball for 0.99.14 was missing. I found it elsewhere, and confirmed that the change was in Linux 0.99 patchlevel 14, Nov 1993. I was hoping that the release description for 0.99.14 by Linus would explain the change, but that too, was a dead end:

Show thread

> I dumped "git log -p" for the entire Linux github repository, which was 4 Gbytes of text, and began reading it backwards to see when the code first appeared. This, too, was a dead end. The oldest change in the entire Linux repo dates back to 2005, when Linus imported Linux 2.6.12-rc2, and this change predates that.

Show thread

I was researching on system load averages and came across this blog post : brendangregg.com/blog/2017-08-

I was surprised with the dedication that this person went ( literally ) digging into archives from 24 years to find the source of one particular change - why factors disk usage ( or any TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE process ) into the system load equation.

( thread )

shine boosted

@shine yeah, Python doesn't like this style. But it can be made more Pythonic:

- provide an empty list as a default to avoid checking for 'route_table' key
- no need to check for `if rtb['route']`, since an empty list just won't iterate
- do it all as a list comprehension to avoid repeatedly calling .append()

So:

public_route_tables = [
route['id']
for rtb in resource_by_type.get('route_table', [])
for route in rtb['route']
if route['id'] in INTERNET_GATEWAY_IDS
]

why am I feeling so guilty about this? should I be feeling guilty about this?

Well, though I didn't want to, I copied the kernel to the systemd-boot end and then everything worked.

But I still don't understand the underlying problem yet. I hope someone can enlighten me.

Show thread

Does someone know how to fix this from the emergency mode shell?

The problem is that my `/boot/efi` is not being mounted during boot via systemd-boot. But it works if I boot via grub.

The same problem exists the other way around - if I boot into another OS from grub ( but its initramfs was compiled using systemd-boot )

`update-initramfs -u` didn't work.

Show thread

the hard way that does not play well with ( or the other way around, maybe )

You cannot boot into an OS ( from systemd-boot ) that did a kernel update when booted via grub and the initramfs was recompiled.

I should have purged grub earlier, but I thought it would be harmless being left alone. :facepalm:

me: *"works" a whole day ( > 8 hours ) and looks at the `git log --oneline`

damn! what update am I supposed to give my boss today?

do I be honest and say that all I was doing all day was _fixing up_ things that were already done earlier?

correction : It is strictly prohibited by and ; but unclear whether it applies to sub-domains as well *in the case of *.

Show thread

I know of the GitLab instance that is at gitlab.gnome.org which is a violation.

Did @gnome obtain any special permissions to use the sub-domain?

I hope that the policy was not overlooked. There should have been some sort of dialogue between the organizations and some arrangement that was reached after deliberation.

Show thread

If you have a personal blog at wordpress.name.tld or a self-hosted gitlab instance at gitlab.name.tld, that is technically violating trademark rules.

I don't think it is strictly enforced though because there aren't any services ( that I know of at least ) that have gathered more popularity ( with misdirection in their domain names ) than the original services.

Show thread

you can't have 'gitlab', 'wordpress' or 'ghost' in top-level domain names because they are protected trademarks.

It is strictly prohibited by and ; but unclear whether it applies to sub-domains as well.

sources :
- GitLab : about.gitlab.com/handbook/mark
- WordPress : wordpressfoundation.org/tradem
- Ghost : ghost.org/trademark/ > Automatic Restriction.

shine boosted

Don't be shy with DNS TTLs.

If you have settled your services on one or more IP addresses, push the TTL up. 12-24 hours are no problem. You mitigate almost all service outages from your DNS providers by that.

Main thing you have to keep in mind is that if you want to move a service around, you can either move the IP address with your service or should to lower the TTL at least 12 hours before moving the service.

#DNS #TTL #admin

shine boosted

@DesCoutinho @praveen 2. Free Software is accountable and without accountability and the option to run a service on our own (a.k.a self-hosting which allows decentralization), we can't simply ensure privacy protection. Closed and centralized services like Facebook, Whatsapp, Twitter, etc. pose a huge threat to our privacy as well as free speech. That's the price we've to pay for our 'convenience' in using their free-of-cost 'services'.

shine boosted

@DesCoutinho This is the simplified version (copied from gnu.org): “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, “free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer”.

If you have any doubts, I'll try to answer them according to my knowledge.

shine boosted

@DesCoutinho Free radicals, nice pun! 😄

BTW software freedom isn't that complex to understand neither it requires knowledge of software engineering. It's basically about four freedoms: Freedom to run the software for any purpose, freedom to study how the software works, freedom to share the software with anyone, freedom to share the modified version of the software.

'Free' in Free Software stands for Freedom!

For more details: gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.htm

Show older
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!