Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #689406 > unrolled thread
| Started by | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-04-23 09:11 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-04-25 01:27 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 258 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-23 09:11 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 12:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 09:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-25 05:12 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 02:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-04-25 19:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-25 15:38 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-26 00:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-24 13:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 09:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:28 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-25 12:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-25 23:16 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 00:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 01:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 03:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-26 07:34 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 08:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 03:00 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 10:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-26 05:53 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-26 11:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 23:00 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:52 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:18 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:45 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:44 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:05 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:11 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 09:02 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:08 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 11:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:13 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-01 14:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 20:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-03 08:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 21:34 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 18:43 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 00:17 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 21:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 07:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 09:13 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 20:16 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-05-02 20:47 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:31 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 00:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 22:16 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 09:31 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 09:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 13:38 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 18:00 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-05 11:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 08:40 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-04 14:40 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-04 11:52 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 20:05 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-05 18:50 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 14:55 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:20 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 11:28 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 00:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 20:15 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 22:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-03 08:29 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 10:39 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-04 10:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 20:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 08:36 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 17:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 14:04 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 18:59 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-05 15:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-06 02:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 11:00 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 20:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 19:43 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 00:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-08 03:28 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-08 10:02 -0400
Linux again (was: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-05-07 04:18 +0000
Re: Linux again (was: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-05-07 00:56 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 07:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-06 08:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 20:43 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-05-07 17:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-05-08 07:06 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-06 06:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-06 11:02 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 19:36 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:16 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 21:23 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 19:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 02:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 07:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-30 18:17 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 13:52 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 22:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 22:57 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:47 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-04-27 09:12 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-28 01:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-04-28 08:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:49 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 07:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-27 08:51 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-04-28 17:42 -0500
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 18:51 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-29 02:26 +0000
Re: Evolution (was Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:33 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:59 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-10 01:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-29 02:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-06-10 01:05 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-26 08:15 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-26 23:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:46 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-27 07:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-27 14:30 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-28 02:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:33 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-27 06:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 08:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-27 14:41 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 07:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-28 11:40 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 12:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:49 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-28 18:03 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 20:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 16:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 06:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 09:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 14:21 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 11:24 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 21:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 17:33 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 22:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 19:37 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-30 00:25 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-30 00:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 18:22 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-30 01:39 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 08:53 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 13:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 13:28 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-02 00:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 21:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 15:31 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 11:41 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:07 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-29 21:03 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:48 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:51 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 03:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 22:49 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:45 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 06:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-04 08:14 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:41 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 15:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 08:56 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 16:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 09:48 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-30 10:10 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-30 09:05 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-05-01 17:04 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-05-01 11:01 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 19:18 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-02 16:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-01 18:47 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 23:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:09 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 03:56 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:42 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 10:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 07:02 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-04 08:39 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 04:44 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-05 06:24 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-30 18:20 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-01 14:01 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 23:15 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-02 19:55 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:32 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-05-03 08:23 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-03 01:06 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-05-03 05:36 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-05-03 04:14 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:26 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 08:48 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 19:58 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-28 16:46 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-29 06:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:38 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 00:11 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-28 17:20 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-29 01:27 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-04-29 02:52 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-29 13:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> - 2025-04-27 08:13 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-26 02:57 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-04-24 18:54 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 20:35 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:04 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-04-24 17:26 -0400
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 21:45 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-04-24 21:48 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:57 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-04-24 21:53 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-04-24 14:58 -0700
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:29 +0000
Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2025-04-25 01:27 +0000
Page 4 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 13 Next page →
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 08:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Z_IRP.308$mVWd.206@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #689952 |
On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>> >>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>> >>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>> Windows managed to. >>>> >>> >>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>> >>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>> BTRFS. >> >> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >> just reinstall and use ext4. >> > > Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. > The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some > new administrative things you have to take care of. > > I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed > checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for > situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically > required. I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 13:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101eree.ti9.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689961 |
On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>>> >>>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>>> Windows managed to. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>>> >>>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>>> BTRFS. >>> >>> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >>> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >>> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >>> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >>> just reinstall and use ext4. >>> >> >> Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. >> The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some >> new administrative things you have to take care of. >> >> I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed >> checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for >> situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically >> required. > > I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say > that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for > a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion > about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or > other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. > Just backup. BTRFS didn't have a good FSCK tool when I needed it (it ended up making a dogs breakfast of the filesystem, to correct one error so minor that it had almost no effect at all on the usage of the drive).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 18:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <VrRRP.978$jny7.676@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #689964 |
On 2025-05-04 09:38, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: >>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>>>> Windows managed to. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>>>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>>>> >>>>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>>>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>>>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>>>> BTRFS. >>>> >>>> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >>>> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >>>> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >>>> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >>>> just reinstall and use ext4. >>>> >>> >>> Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. >>> The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some >>> new administrative things you have to take care of. >>> >>> I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed >>> checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for >>> situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically >>> required. >> >> I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say >> that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for >> a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion >> about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or >> other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. >> > > Just backup. BTRFS didn't have a good FSCK tool when I needed it (it > ended up making a dogs breakfast of the filesystem, to correct one error > so minor that it had almost no effect at all on the usage of the drive). Out of curiosity, how long ago was this? -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 11:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101h6og.9dp.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689981 |
On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-04 09:38, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>>>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>>>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>>>>> Windows managed to. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>>>>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>>>>> >>>>>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>>>>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>>>>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>>>>> BTRFS. >>>>> >>>>> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >>>>> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >>>>> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >>>>> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >>>>> just reinstall and use ext4. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. >>>> The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some >>>> new administrative things you have to take care of. >>>> >>>> I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed >>>> checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for >>>> situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically >>>> required. >>> >>> I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say >>> that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for >>> a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion >>> about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or >>> other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. >>> >> >> Just backup. BTRFS didn't have a good FSCK tool when I needed it (it >> ended up making a dogs breakfast of the filesystem, to correct one error >> so minor that it had almost no effect at all on the usage of the drive). > > Out of curiosity, how long ago was this? > Not sure exactly, but I would guess 10 years ago. A long time ago now. I can't comment on BTRFS fsck since then as I've never needed to use it again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 08:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <9l2SP.1330$RXsc.1038@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #689996 |
On 2025-05-05 07:03, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-05-04 09:38, Borax Man wrote: >>> On 2025-05-04, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-04 05:51, Borax Man wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-03 06:50, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>>>>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>>>>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>>>>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>>>>>>>>> about it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>>>>>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>>>>>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>>>>>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>>>>>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>>>>>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>>>>>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>>>>>>>>> his murderous impulses. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>>>>>>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>>>>>>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>>>>>>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >>>>>>>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >>>>>>>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >>>>>>>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >>>>>>>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long >>>>>>>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for >>>>>>>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that >>>>>>>> Windows managed to. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've used it for storage partitions, and on my wifes laptops. So far >>>>>>> its been pretty good, and I've been using it for years now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It has a bad repuation, but my personal experience is good. I didn't >>>>>>> use it on this laptop, mostly because I wasn't going to use the >>>>>>> features, needed something basic. Maybe I'll convert this laptop to >>>>>>> BTRFS. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm always wary of converting one filesystem to another. It just gives >>>>>> me the impression that things are very likely to break. I'm just hoping >>>>>> that I'm not wrong about btrfs and that despite its reputation with >>>>>> some, it's as rock-solid as I've been led to believe. If it isn't, I'll >>>>>> just reinstall and use ext4. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Don't bother unless you've got a good reason to use it. It's good, yes. >>>>> The snapshots are useful, but so are backups. It does introduce some >>>>> new administrative things you have to take care of. >>>>> >>>>> I use it on volumes where I specifically required snapshots, and needed >>>>> checksumming. It's good, but I would still recommend EXT4 for >>>>> situations where BTRFS's additional features are not specifically >>>>> required. >>>> >>>> I can't say that I've ever had problems with ext4, but I also can't say >>>> that I've ever had trouble with btrfs either. If I end up keeping it for >>>> a long time on this laptop, I'll be able to form a, educated opinion >>>> about how reliable btrfs is. I imagine that I might lose data here or >>>> other, but I doubt it will ever be as bad as NTFS. >>>> >>> >>> Just backup. BTRFS didn't have a good FSCK tool when I needed it (it >>> ended up making a dogs breakfast of the filesystem, to correct one error >>> so minor that it had almost no effect at all on the usage of the drive). >> >> Out of curiosity, how long ago was this? >> > > Not sure exactly, but I would guess 10 years ago. A long time ago now. > > I can't comment on BTRFS fsck since then as I've never needed to use it > again. I imagine that most of it has been fixed by now. At least, I hope it has. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 14:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101euhv.1vhl8.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> |
| In reply to | #689899 |
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 02:16 this Saturday (GMT): > On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>> >>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every >>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything >>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its >>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot >>>>> about it. >>>> >>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some >>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as >>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a >>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3 >>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder. >>>> >>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety >>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to >>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress >>>> his murderous impulses. >>> >>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was >>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the >>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at >>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it. >>> >> >> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but >> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, >> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files >> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference >> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. > > Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long > term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for > snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that > Windows managed to. Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea. -- user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 11:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vv82gi$29efv$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #689965 |
candycanearter07 wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote at 02:16 this Saturday (GMT):
>> On 2025-05-02 20:13, Borax Man wrote:
>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2025-05-02 16:16, rbowman wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2 May 2025 09:13:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't know much about ReiserFS back around 2004, but every
>>>>>> publication was saying that it was a huge improvement over everything
>>>>>> else so I used it in the limited time I ran Gentoo. I can't speak to its
>>>>>> worth. In fact, I'm happy you mentioned it because I largely forgot
>>>>>> about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a journaling file system, which ext2 was not and faster for some
>>>>> operations. Linux was trailing the pack. AIX was journaled in the '90s, as
>>>>> was NTFS. ext3 came out in 2001, the same year as ReiserFS but it took a
>>>>> while to catch on. Distros cited technical reasons for going to ext3
>>>>> rather than Reiser being on trial for murder.
>>>>>
>>>>> btrfs owes more to ReiserFS 4 than ext3/ext4. Without the notoriety
>>>>> ReiserFS would probably have been developed instead. Not a good idea to
>>>>> name a project after yourself although Torvalds has been able to suppress
>>>>> his murderous impulses.
>>>>
>>>> I can't recall what made me want to try ReiserFS but I believe it was
>>>> the journaling function. As a user, you don't really see any of the
>>>> benefits, but at the time I had no idea that it wasn't a new feature at
>>>> all. I was completely unaware that NTFS already had it.
>>>
>>> It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but
>>> also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me,
>>> NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files
>>> reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference
>>> if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user.
>>
>> Well, I can only hope that btrfs is an excellent filesystem for the long
>> term because that's what I chose. Just to be safe, I set it up for
>> snapshots, but I can't imagine it corrupting my data the way that
>> Windows managed to.
>
> Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea.
Indeed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYKAzjT0e_8
Canon Helpdesk Call
--
A diplomat's life consists of three things: protocol, Geritol, and alcohol.
-- Adlai Stevenson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-04 20:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7pvk0Fjq4qU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #689965 |
On Sun, 4 May 2025 14:40:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: > Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea. At work we also kept source code backups off-site -- physical DVDs not cloud. We used Subversion for source control so there were also many machines that had checked out the whole tree. I did use the corporate One Drive for projects I was working on, which was also handy for synching between machines. I'm not as religious about backups at home. TBH I don't have that much that is irreplaceable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 04:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101ggsb.aov8.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home> |
| In reply to | #689973 |
On 2025-05-04, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On Sun, 4 May 2025 14:40:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: > >> Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea. > > At work we also kept source code backups off-site -- physical DVDs not > cloud. We used Subversion for source control so there were also many > machines that had checked out the whole tree. > > I did use the corporate One Drive for projects I was working on, which was > also handy for synching between machines. > > I'm not as religious about backups at home. TBH I don't have that much > that is irreplaceable. Same here. I do backup stuff I don't want to lose, but there's not much of it that's worth backing up. -- Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin with them. Know the difference.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 18:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101i1kp.19ssl.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> |
| In reply to | #689989 |
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote at 04:50 this Monday (GMT): > On 2025-05-04, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 4 May 2025 14:40:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >> >>> Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea. >> >> At work we also kept source code backups off-site -- physical DVDs not >> cloud. We used Subversion for source control so there were also many >> machines that had checked out the whole tree. >> >> I did use the corporate One Drive for projects I was working on, which was >> also handy for synching between machines. >> >> I'm not as religious about backups at home. TBH I don't have that much >> that is irreplaceable. > > Same here. I do backup stuff I don't want to lose, but there's not much of > it that's worth backing up. I at least back up my home partition. -- user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 14:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0c2i1kl03v1snltrto14u429l2f5rktvq7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #690003 |
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote: >RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote at 04:50 this Monday (GMT): >> On 2025-05-04, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, 4 May 2025 14:40:04 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote: >>> >>>> Keeping off-computer backups is also not a bad idea. >>> >>> At work we also kept source code backups off-site -- physical DVDs not >>> cloud. We used Subversion for source control so there were also many >>> machines that had checked out the whole tree. >>> >>> I did use the corporate One Drive for projects I was working on, which was >>> also handy for synching between machines. >>> >>> I'm not as religious about backups at home. TBH I don't have that much >>> that is irreplaceable. >> >> Same here. I do backup stuff I don't want to lose, but there's not much of >> it that's worth backing up. > >I at least back up my home partition. I just mirror files on my second SSD and external hard drive, it would take a tornado hit to get rid of my data, without uploading it all to "the cloud". -- Joel W. Crump Amendment XIV Section 1. [...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-03 04:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7lkd0Ft7qdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #689894 |
On Sat, 3 May 2025 00:13:50 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote: > It was apparently much better when there were lots of small files, but > also a bit more prone to corruption. ext3 has been rock solid for me, > NEVER failed me, and the point of a filesystem is to store my files > reliably. Most of the time, you won't notice a performance difference > if you're just a regular desktop/laptop user. Ubuntu and I assume most of the Debian derivatives use ext4 and Fedora uses btrfs. They both work. I'm not sure ext4 has much to offer over ext3. Most of my installs in the last decade have been 'do whatever you want to do. Use the whole drive, knock yourself out'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 15:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn1019om7.2rt.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689820 |
On 2025-05-01, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-01 10:15, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-04-30, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-04-30 06:24, Borax Man wrote: >>> >>> < snipped for brevity > >>> >>>> >>>> To be honest, it was many years of using a PC before I too understood >>>> that there could be a viable alternative on the PC, and I was more "tech >>>> literate" than average. This was in the 90s. I knew of OS2 and some >>>> toy OS's. I started to get annoyed with Windows, and desire features >>>> and abilities that it was lacking. When I found that Linux was a thing, >>>> it kind of mostly met what I was looking for (more power!). >>> >>> I was always curious, so it didn't take long for me to learn that there >>> were things other than DOS back in the day. I got acquainted with >>> Windows 3.0 fairly quickly, learned abut MacOS quickly thereafter and >>> soon developed an interest in OS/2 since my nerdy cousin assured me that >>> it was better than everything under the sun. Admittedly, I remained in >>> the Windows camp during that time but kept trying Linux out from about >>> 1994 or 1995 on. I recall installing Slackware on my PC through >>> floppies, but I had no idea how to get much done. I tried again in 1998, >>> but I couldn't get sound to work and the resolution couldn't get past >>> 800x600 (I had no idea what I was doing). By 1999, I was ready to move >>> but Linux itself wasn't entirely ready for what I wanted to do. I only >>> really started using it as the main OS on my Dell laptop around 2008 (it >>> worked great on that), but even then I kept Windows as my overall main >>> operating system. Once the PRISM revelations emerged, my interest in >>> Linux grew and I kept trying to make it my default operating system with >>> various degrees of success. Now, I can confidently say that there are >>> way more benefits than there are drawbacks, no matter what hardware I >>> run it on. >>> >> >> I had seen references to Linux here and there on the Internet in the >> late 90s, but I just supposed that as a system I would not either be >> able to run it, or make good use of it. I was invested in DOS, DOS >> games and programs, programming in DOS so while I didn't like Windows >> much, I wasn't that interested in leaving the ecosystem I did >> understand. >> >> However by 1999-2000, after having to reinstall windows again and again, >> and knowing that staying in the past wasn't the way forward, thats when >> I took Linux seriously, after hearing a bit more about it. I still knew >> very little, except it was good for the Internet and that it might be >> good for "power users". >> >> I was browsing a newsagency late 2000, saw a copy of Linux Format with a >> Definite Linux 7.0 cover disk and decided to give it a try. Then I >> learned about it being a Unix close, about the Free Software movement, >> and saw a bit more of a world of computing, with a long history that I >> had seen references to, but was now a part of. > > I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has > the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and > claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. > Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing > software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its > benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the > operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. > I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. >>> I found Linux to be just as crashy as Windows in the late 90s. I had >>> hope that BeOS might penetrate the market since it was a lot more robust >>> than the two, but it went nowhere. I would say that Linux's core was >>> always quite stable but everything atop it not so much. In my opinion, >>> it only became rock solid in the last decade or so. >>> >> >> That was my experience too. When I first used it, programs would just >> dissapear, and leave a "core" file. Individual programs DID crash more >> than in Windows, but they rarely took the system down with it. There >> were fewer crashes on Windows, but they were often more catastrophic, >> taking everything down with it. A Linux program crash, well, it just >> vanished. At least everything else was usually untouchged. When I >> found I could telnet into the system, on the occasions the screen did >> freeze, I could either kill the process, kill X, or shut the system >> down, at least avoiding an unclean unmount. >> >> But I would say by Red Hat 7.3 (the 2003 one), it was much better, and >> improved since then. As has, admittedly, Windows, though it has other >> janky behaviour. > > I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s > and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly > on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old > AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine > for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or > so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an > update or corrupted system files. > > I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two computers to Debian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 11:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Rw5RP.1019$dJ7a.260@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #689861 |
On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: < snipped for brevity > >> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >> > > > I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of > support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the > dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but > misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the > computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at > least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). > > The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get > much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified > source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this > evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills > to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the > programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for > something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. > > Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have > choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things > together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, > NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux allows us to prevent that from happening. >> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >> update or corrupted system files. >> >> > > I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my > system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, > like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full > screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what > you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from > Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install > an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only > reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to > jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two > computers to Debian. Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to ensure that I can keep my desktop running. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-03 00:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101anpr.3om.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689862 |
On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: > >< snipped for brevity > > >>> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >>> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >>> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >>> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >>> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >>> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >>> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >>> >> >> >> I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of >> support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the >> dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but >> misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the >> computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at >> least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). >> >> The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get >> much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified >> source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this >> evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills >> to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the >> programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for >> something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. >> >> Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have >> choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things >> together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, >> NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. > > I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running > today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't > realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money > they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or > so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be > replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux > allows us to prevent that from happening. > The desktop I'm typing this message on, I build in 2009. I have not had a need to upgrade, except for a scant few games I would not mind playing. Just a few games, thats it. Because I don't game, there is no other issue, at all, with having this "old" PC. It runs fine in every other way. This was why when my wife wanted a new Apple, I talked her into a Linux box. WE don't want to be in the situation where software goes obsolete, and the new OS cannot be installed anymore. >>> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >>> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >>> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >>> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >>> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >>> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >>> update or corrupted system files. >>> >>> >> >> I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my >> system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, >> like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full >> screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what >> you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from >> Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install >> an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only >> reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to >> jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two >> computers to Debian. > > Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor > automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to > highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, > simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so > trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage > losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from > the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly > becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to > ensure that I can keep my desktop running. > The last time I had to reinstall a system because it broke was over 20 years ago. And when that happened, I probably could have fixed it, but I didn't take backups (bad idea!). My daughter has a laptop for school with Windows 11. Today its going to become a dual boot machine. I'm a little undecided on the distro, either Linux Mint, Linux Mint Debian edition or plain Debian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 20:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MedRP.2$_ogc.1@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #689893 |
On 2025-05-02 20:11, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: >> >> < snipped for brevity > >> >>>> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >>>> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >>>> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >>>> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >>>> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >>>> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >>>> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >>>> >>> >>> >>> I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of >>> support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the >>> dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but >>> misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the >>> computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at >>> least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). >>> >>> The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get >>> much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified >>> source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this >>> evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills >>> to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the >>> programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for >>> something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. >>> >>> Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have >>> choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things >>> together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, >>> NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. >> >> I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running >> today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't >> realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money >> they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or >> so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be >> replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux >> allows us to prevent that from happening. >> > > The desktop I'm typing this message on, I build in 2009. I have not had > a need to upgrade, except for a scant few games I would not mind > playing. Just a few games, thats it. Because I don't game, there is no > other issue, at all, with having this "old" PC. It runs fine in every > other way. > > This was why when my wife wanted a new Apple, I talked her into a Linux > box. WE don't want to be in the situation where software goes obsolete, > and the new OS cannot be installed anymore. That's the kind of life I want to have. Constantly buying new hardware is just ridiculous, especially since the demands of technology aren't changing all that much. Web sites are mostly the same today as they were back then, only video games are becoming increasingly demanding (all the while not looking any different). >>>> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >>>> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >>>> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >>>> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >>>> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >>>> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >>>> update or corrupted system files. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my >>> system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, >>> like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full >>> screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what >>> you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from >>> Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install >>> an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only >>> reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to >>> jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two >>> computers to Debian. >> >> Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor >> automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to >> highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, >> simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so >> trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage >> losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from >> the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly >> becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to >> ensure that I can keep my desktop running. >> > > The last time I had to reinstall a system because it broke was over 20 > years ago. And when that happened, I probably could have fixed it, but > I didn't take backups (bad idea!). > > My daughter has a laptop for school with Windows 11. Today its going to > become a dual boot machine. I'm a little undecided on the distro, either > Linux Mint, Linux Mint Debian edition or plain Debian. She agreed to using Linux? Women are harder to sell on the idea. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-03 01:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101aqp7.7mc.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689895 |
On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-02 20:11, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: >>> >>> < snipped for brevity > >>> >>>>> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >>>>> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >>>>> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >>>>> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >>>>> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >>>>> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >>>>> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of >>>> support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the >>>> dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but >>>> misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the >>>> computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at >>>> least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). >>>> >>>> The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get >>>> much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified >>>> source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this >>>> evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills >>>> to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the >>>> programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for >>>> something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. >>>> >>>> Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have >>>> choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things >>>> together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, >>>> NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. >>> >>> I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running >>> today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't >>> realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money >>> they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or >>> so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be >>> replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux >>> allows us to prevent that from happening. >>> >> >> The desktop I'm typing this message on, I build in 2009. I have not had >> a need to upgrade, except for a scant few games I would not mind >> playing. Just a few games, thats it. Because I don't game, there is no >> other issue, at all, with having this "old" PC. It runs fine in every >> other way. >> >> This was why when my wife wanted a new Apple, I talked her into a Linux >> box. WE don't want to be in the situation where software goes obsolete, >> and the new OS cannot be installed anymore. > > That's the kind of life I want to have. Constantly buying new hardware > is just ridiculous, especially since the demands of technology aren't > changing all that much. Web sites are mostly the same today as they were > back then, only video games are becoming increasingly demanding (all the > while not looking any different). > >>>>> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >>>>> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >>>>> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >>>>> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >>>>> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >>>>> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >>>>> update or corrupted system files. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my >>>> system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, >>>> like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full >>>> screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what >>>> you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from >>>> Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install >>>> an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only >>>> reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to >>>> jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two >>>> computers to Debian. >>> >>> Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor >>> automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to >>> highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, >>> simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so >>> trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage >>> losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from >>> the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly >>> becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to >>> ensure that I can keep my desktop running. >>> >> >> The last time I had to reinstall a system because it broke was over 20 >> years ago. And when that happened, I probably could have fixed it, but >> I didn't take backups (bad idea!). >> >> My daughter has a laptop for school with Windows 11. Today its going to >> become a dual boot machine. I'm a little undecided on the distro, either >> Linux Mint, Linux Mint Debian edition or plain Debian. > > She agreed to using Linux? Women are harder to sell on the idea. > She doesn't know much about computers. Was an Apple user since childhood, so it was just a habit. She didn't like the fact that the browser broke, because it couldn't be updated, because the OS couldn't be updated. I said that she can get a new Apple for $$$$ and face the same situation again, but my system, which I built once, runs and runs and runs and stays up to date. She then left it to me to choose a system which would just work. As all she does is web browse, and look at photos, and I know how to troubleshoot Linux, and don't know MacOS, I made the decision. So far so good. One niggling issue with Plasma detecting false clicks, but the next update (When she lets me install it) should fix it. Really, if you live entirely in the browser, you don't need the Apple Premium.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 22:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s7fRP.3$jny7.2@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #689896 |
On 2025-05-02 21:02, Borax Man wrote: > On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> On 2025-05-02 20:11, Borax Man wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: >>>> >>>> < snipped for brevity > >>>> >>>>>> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >>>>>> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >>>>>> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >>>>>> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >>>>>> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >>>>>> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >>>>>> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of >>>>> support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the >>>>> dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but >>>>> misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the >>>>> computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at >>>>> least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). >>>>> >>>>> The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get >>>>> much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified >>>>> source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this >>>>> evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills >>>>> to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the >>>>> programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for >>>>> something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. >>>>> >>>>> Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have >>>>> choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things >>>>> together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, >>>>> NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. >>>> >>>> I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running >>>> today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't >>>> realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money >>>> they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or >>>> so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be >>>> replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux >>>> allows us to prevent that from happening. >>>> >>> >>> The desktop I'm typing this message on, I build in 2009. I have not had >>> a need to upgrade, except for a scant few games I would not mind >>> playing. Just a few games, thats it. Because I don't game, there is no >>> other issue, at all, with having this "old" PC. It runs fine in every >>> other way. >>> >>> This was why when my wife wanted a new Apple, I talked her into a Linux >>> box. WE don't want to be in the situation where software goes obsolete, >>> and the new OS cannot be installed anymore. >> >> That's the kind of life I want to have. Constantly buying new hardware >> is just ridiculous, especially since the demands of technology aren't >> changing all that much. Web sites are mostly the same today as they were >> back then, only video games are becoming increasingly demanding (all the >> while not looking any different). >> >>>>>> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >>>>>> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >>>>>> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >>>>>> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >>>>>> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >>>>>> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >>>>>> update or corrupted system files. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my >>>>> system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, >>>>> like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full >>>>> screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what >>>>> you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from >>>>> Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install >>>>> an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only >>>>> reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to >>>>> jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two >>>>> computers to Debian. >>>> >>>> Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor >>>> automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to >>>> highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, >>>> simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so >>>> trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage >>>> losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from >>>> the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly >>>> becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to >>>> ensure that I can keep my desktop running. >>>> >>> >>> The last time I had to reinstall a system because it broke was over 20 >>> years ago. And when that happened, I probably could have fixed it, but >>> I didn't take backups (bad idea!). >>> >>> My daughter has a laptop for school with Windows 11. Today its going to >>> become a dual boot machine. I'm a little undecided on the distro, either >>> Linux Mint, Linux Mint Debian edition or plain Debian. >> >> She agreed to using Linux? Women are harder to sell on the idea. >> > > She doesn't know much about computers. Was an Apple user since > childhood, so it was just a habit. She didn't like the fact that the > browser broke, because it couldn't be updated, because the OS couldn't > be updated. I said that she can get a new Apple for $$$$ and face the > same situation again, but my system, which I built once, runs and runs > and runs and stays up to date. She then left it to me to choose a > system which would just work. > > As all she does is web browse, and look at photos, and I know how to > troubleshoot Linux, and don't know MacOS, I made the decision. So far > so good. One niggling issue with Plasma detecting false clicks, but the > next update (When she lets me install it) should fix it. Really, if you > live entirely in the browser, you don't need the Apple Premium. For someone with very basic needs, there is absolutely no reason why Linux wouldn't be better than MacOS. Browsers boot up faster, as do the photo viewing and management programs. Additionally, you can update it for as long as you wish to keep the hardware, it only gets discarded when it becomes irreparable or a chore to use. The thought that one would have to get rid of their machine because a company like Microsoft or Apple is no longer willing to supply updates, preventing users from even using a browser is just ridiculous. Heck, it's inhumane. I actually counted the cost of computers for a typical user. If you bought a machine in 2020 for $2,000 and used it until 2025, you would have essentially paid $400 a year for hardware that does exactly the same thing you were doing twenty years earlier, except faster. Perhaps that $400 number doesn't affect others, but I find that it's a high price to pay for the luxury of browsing and sending a few e-mails. At some point, it only makes sense to reject the idea that a new machine needs to be purchased so often. Heck, five years is conservative; a lot of people replace them a lot earlier than that. That's just how long I usually keep my hardware. I'm going to try to go for a decade this time. -- God be with you, CrudeSausage KDE & LibreOffice supporter John 14:6
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-03 10:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn101btj0.6df.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> |
| In reply to | #689900 |
On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > On 2025-05-02 21:02, Borax Man wrote: >> On 2025-05-03, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02 20:11, Borax Man wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-02, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02 11:20, Borax Man wrote: >>>>> >>>>> < snipped for brevity > >>>>> >>>>>>> I think that Linux would have been adopted faster in the late 90s has >>>>>>> the Linux zealots at the time not been lying through their teeth and >>>>>>> claiming that Linux was stable and worked perfectly across the board. >>>>>>> Most people didn't know a thing about repositories and installing >>>>>>> software through, didn't understand what open-source was and what its >>>>>>> benefits could be and definitely weren't open to persevering with the >>>>>>> operating system when their hardware didn't work the way that it should. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that would have made much of a difference. With lack of >>>>>> support for hardware, and games, and MS Office, I think they were the >>>>>> dealbreakers. I do think they were a bit, not dishonest, but >>>>>> misleading. It was said that Linux helped you learn more about the >>>>>> computer, but in really you learn about Linux, not the computer (at >>>>>> least not the hardware, that is abstracted away from you). >>>>>> >>>>>> The whole "Free Software" thing was also a big misdirect. You don't get >>>>>> much freedom from being able to modify and redistribute the modified >>>>>> source code. I started using Linux before I knew about this, but this >>>>>> evangelism was mostly meaningless to people who didn't have the skills >>>>>> to actually make significant change to the kernel, or any of the >>>>>> programs. I felt this "benefit" was just Linux evangelists reaching for >>>>>> something, and being unaware, by design, of reality. >>>>>> >>>>>> Linux (and Unix like systems) actually offer freedom because you have >>>>>> choices of workflows, of tools, and you are able to compose things >>>>>> together. The freedom comes because you can craft your own experience, >>>>>> NOT because of the GPL. Too much was made of the GPL being freedom. >>>>> >>>>> I enjoy the freedom of knowing that the operating system I am running >>>>> today will run just as well on this machine in five years. People don't >>>>> realize how refreshing that it until they start realizing how much money >>>>> they've been spending on technology, trying to keep up over a decade or >>>>> so. Things become obsolete, but there is no reason for them to be >>>>> replaced within three years the way that they used to in the 90s. Linux >>>>> allows us to prevent that from happening. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The desktop I'm typing this message on, I build in 2009. I have not had >>>> a need to upgrade, except for a scant few games I would not mind >>>> playing. Just a few games, thats it. Because I don't game, there is no >>>> other issue, at all, with having this "old" PC. It runs fine in every >>>> other way. >>>> >>>> This was why when my wife wanted a new Apple, I talked her into a Linux >>>> box. WE don't want to be in the situation where software goes obsolete, >>>> and the new OS cannot be installed anymore. >>> >>> That's the kind of life I want to have. Constantly buying new hardware >>> is just ridiculous, especially since the demands of technology aren't >>> changing all that much. Web sites are mostly the same today as they were >>> back then, only video games are becoming increasingly demanding (all the >>> while not looking any different). >>> >>>>>>> I had a lot of luck with the SUSE Linux versions back in the late 90s >>>>>>> and early 2000s. Tumbleweed was also the first Linux to work perfectly >>>>>>> on my old MSI for suspend (admittedly, Linux worked perfectly on my old >>>>>>> AMD-centric Dell laptop in the late 2000s). Windows has always been fine >>>>>>> for me, but I would also reinstall that thing once every three months or >>>>>>> so. Even in that short time though, it managed to screw up from an >>>>>>> update or corrupted system files. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I could not stand at all, formatting and reinstalling. I customise my >>>>>> system, and losing all those settings, those small changes you make, >>>>>> like that file I added to stop the windows key screwing up the full >>>>>> screen DOS prompt. You've got to do them all again, and remember what >>>>>> you did. That was one of my top 3 pet peeves that moved me away from >>>>>> Windows. Perhaps top one. I very, very rarely reinstall. One I install >>>>>> an OS, I expect it to remain until the computer dies. I've only >>>>>> reinstalled Linux maybe three times in the last 10 -15 years. Once to >>>>>> jump from Fedora 11 to 18 or something, the other two to switch two >>>>>> computers to Debian. >>>>> >>>>> Funny enough, the one feature I find most useful in Linux is the cursor >>>>> automatically becoming gigantic if you lose track of it. When I want to >>>>> highlight a word or a text to kids who see a duplicate of my screen, >>>>> simply jiggling my mouse around makes the cursor huge. It seems so >>>>> trivial, but it's a fantastic feature of KDE for teaching. I can manage >>>>> losing some customization myself, but only because I got used to it from >>>>> the constant formatting of the 1990s. With age, it is admittedly >>>>> becoming more of a chore which is partly why I set up Timeshift to >>>>> ensure that I can keep my desktop running. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The last time I had to reinstall a system because it broke was over 20 >>>> years ago. And when that happened, I probably could have fixed it, but >>>> I didn't take backups (bad idea!). >>>> >>>> My daughter has a laptop for school with Windows 11. Today its going to >>>> become a dual boot machine. I'm a little undecided on the distro, either >>>> Linux Mint, Linux Mint Debian edition or plain Debian. >>> >>> She agreed to using Linux? Women are harder to sell on the idea. >>> >> >> She doesn't know much about computers. Was an Apple user since >> childhood, so it was just a habit. She didn't like the fact that the >> browser broke, because it couldn't be updated, because the OS couldn't >> be updated. I said that she can get a new Apple for $$$$ and face the >> same situation again, but my system, which I built once, runs and runs >> and runs and stays up to date. She then left it to me to choose a >> system which would just work. >> >> As all she does is web browse, and look at photos, and I know how to >> troubleshoot Linux, and don't know MacOS, I made the decision. So far >> so good. One niggling issue with Plasma detecting false clicks, but the >> next update (When she lets me install it) should fix it. Really, if you >> live entirely in the browser, you don't need the Apple Premium. > > For someone with very basic needs, there is absolutely no reason why > Linux wouldn't be better than MacOS. Browsers boot up faster, as do the > photo viewing and management programs. Additionally, you can update it > for as long as you wish to keep the hardware, it only gets discarded > when it becomes irreparable or a chore to use. The thought that one > would have to get rid of their machine because a company like Microsoft > or Apple is no longer willing to supply updates, preventing users from > even using a browser is just ridiculous. Heck, it's inhumane. > That was exactly our rationale. $2000 for Apple, or about $600 for a decent refurbished Thinkpad, to do the EXACT SAME THING. It was a no-brainer really. And yes, the "on site tech support" is a feature, and does matter. She wanted to play "Carmen San Deigo", on the laptop, knowing how the system worked, it was easy for me to install DosBox and set up a script which went straight into the game from an icon. The "How do I" question gets an answer. > I actually counted the cost of computers for a typical user. If you > bought a machine in 2020 for $2,000 and used it until 2025, you would > have essentially paid $400 a year for hardware that does exactly the > same thing you were doing twenty years earlier, except faster. Perhaps > that $400 number doesn't affect others, but I find that it's a high > price to pay for the luxury of browsing and sending a few e-mails. At > some point, it only makes sense to reject the idea that a new machine > needs to be purchased so often. Heck, five years is conservative; a lot > of people replace them a lot earlier than that. That's just how long I > usually keep my hardware. I'm going to try to go for a decade this time. > If you don't play games or do video editing, you could get easily 5 years out of a computer these days. Now with phones, its harder, you don't have a viable option.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-03 08:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <vv527n$3g7ee$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #689917 |
Borax Man wrote this post while blinking in Morse code: > If you don't play games or do video editing, you could get easily 5 > years out of a computer these days. Now with phones, its harder, you > don't have a viable option. My Lenovo Flex 14 is almost 7 years old, still in great shape (for a long time I used a keyboard protector). I have an ASUS that's 12 or so, but right now it's powered down since I don't need it. On that one, the keys are badly worn, and so is the keyboard cover. Got an older desktop box in the attic. -- You like to think that you're immune to the stuff (Oh Yeah!) It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough; You know you're gonna have to face it, You're addicted to love!" -- Robert Palmer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web