I can tell you don't use Linux on a regular basis. Don't mistakenly think that Windows' broken localization applies to Linux. The Linux commandline and terminal has been localized for many years with no issues as you report.

Maybe in Windows things are bad, but in Linux, scripts will work regardless of the localization. The command names don't change, nor do the command-line options. But filenames and data certainly can be in any language. Unlike Windows, system folders do not change names. It's possible that grepping for specific output from programs will fail. But if you're doing that in your script, you can set the LANG variable to whatever language the you need (probably english to be most universal).

Again, though, this has nothing to do with the idea of putting kernel VT code in userspace. There are valid arguments against this idea, but I've not read of any on slashdot yet. Just knee-jerk teeth knashing, and, sadly, more inappropriate ad hominom attacks.

Oh really? From the sound of it, VT code in the kernel hasn't been KISS in a long time, certainly not since KML was introduced. Was KML a solution in search of a problem? Hardly. The VT code is full of hacks, bugs, and hard to fix and improve. And we're not just referring to the lack of unicode support, which isn't hugely important. This knee-jerk reaction to systemd is way silly too. One would think Linux users would understand that moving things out of the kernel into userspace is desirable, especially on a server, and especially in an environment where virtualization is the norm. Besides all this,you could just, you know, not run the systemd console daemon. Linux has always supported serial terminals, and will continue to do so. If you're a hardcore server operator (physical or virtual servers) I'm sure you already have this set up.

Just to nuance my answer a bit more... not completely wasted. Fruit, flowers, and other things do absorb other wavelengths. And there are other things in a full spectrum light that probably help the plant too, such as UV, infrared. Light that does bounce off the plant, though, is "wasted" and that is most of the full spectrum light, or the HFS light.

There are several experiments in growing crops in green houses under magenta lighting with success. It's the most efficient way to artificially light plants.

No the OP is correct. Plants use red and blue light for photosynthesis, not green. Green does very little for the plants and in fact very little is absorbed by the plant, some more than others. That's why plants look, um, green. An HPS lamp may work because it puts out sufficient red wavelengths for the plant to absorb. The rest is completely wasted. So yes it works, but not very efficiently. Most of the light just bounces off the plant.

Unless this is new in the last month, no it certainly doesn't. Stop spreading this kind of misinformation.

Funny, your comment about leaving Gnome 3 speaks nothing at all about systemd. I can certainly understand your dislike of Gnome 3. I also share it, and use the Mate desktop.

Again, though, what does any of this has to do with systemd? Can you state your specific problems with it (I mean actual problems, not hypothetical, philosophical ones)? Many folks are running distros using systemd under the hood, using a variety of desktop interfaces (Gnome, KDE, Mate, XFCE, etc) for a couple of years now. Seems to do the job, and my first experience setting up a daemon service using systemd was way more pleasant and simpler than under sysv init.

The issue was hotly debated and decided on some months ago. Sorry you're late to the party!

Good idea! Thanks.

Sadly, none of the Oculus headsets out so far will work for me, as my IPD is too narrow (52 mm). Most devices go from 57 or 58 mm to wider. I guess I'll have to wait for the technology to be ubiquitous enough that they start making children's headsets. If this ever happens, I'd love to check it out. I've always wanted this sort of immersive 3D.

FUD again. The udev module of systemd does not run under PID=1! Please take a look at how systemd is organized before you post something like this.

$ ps axf | grep systemd | grep -v grep
    1 ? Ss 0:47 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd --system --deserialize 16
  247 ? Ss 2:48 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-journald
  603 ? Ss 2:20 /bin/dbus-daemon --system --address=systemd: --nofork --nopidfile --systemd-activation
19211 ? Ss 0:00 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd
19260 ? Ss 0:18 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-logind

systemd encompasses many things that used to be separate, but that doesn't mean they all run in the same process. Functionality is still kept modular, and you can update systemd without requiring a reboot most of the time. systemctl --daemon-reexec will reload the updated modules.

I'm not a fan of *ctl commands (hard to type, they don't roll off the fingers), but they are okay.

Phoronix take on this is hilarious. A "boycott of systemd" led to the development of uselessd? Rather it looks to me like the uselessd developers saw that systemd had some very good ideas, and they wanted to have that, minus some parts they didn't like, on systems that aren't glibc, and aren't linux. This is part evolution, part competition. Either way it enhances Lenardts' position all along, that traditional script-based system v init is horribly broken. For even uselessd now supports socket activation (systemd's main feature) and process supervision, the latter being sorely lacking from sys v init for many years.

In any event, this is all great news. If anything it paves the way to support modern operating system features on non-linux systems, and non-gnu systems. Part of what's required to finally port modern GUI systems like Gnome 3 to other platforms.

Back when I was a computer science student just learning Linux, kdevelop was one of the apps that made Linux accessible for me. That and kde itself. Once I got acclimated, I quickly switched to vim and ended with gnome. But I've always had a soft spot for kdevelop and think it's great they've come so far.

I guess you watched a different Star Trek than I did. Early on it became apparent that Vulcans do have emotions, very deep ones at that. They just chose to let logic and reason form a foundation for thought and way of life. Star Trek 6 inparticular shows a very different Spock than the one you remember. And frankly I like the evolution. He became a man of wisdom, understanding, loyalty, love, and keen humor. And in their own way Vulcans are deeply spiritual. They meditate, revere their ancestors, and have the idea of a vulcan soul. There is even a deep religious component to Vulcan culture (poorly shown in Star Trek III, and often mocked by Mad magazine). Sarek's love affair with Amanda is particularly poignant, even in the few minutes of screen time it got in the TV series. I love the take on it that A.C. Crispin came up with in with her novel, Sarek. Not canon at all, of course, but it's the way I like to think of Vulcans. Highly recommend that novel. Love, happiness, passion, grief, logic.

I hate the way vulcans were portrayed in Star Trek Enterprise, particularly the way Blalock portrayed her character. Apparently she chose not to study vulcan portrayals in any of the other tv shows and movies, and did her own thing. It stinks. Comes across as just a sullen, maladjusted person (the sociopath that you seem to associate wrongly with Spock). That's not how Vulcans are at all, at least in the shows and movies I've seen.

Not only that but the companies that manage the booking infrastructure take a cut.

I just need some gas money.