why is there no "repair file" command, which calculates a correct checksum to the broken data?
you're argumenting the wrong way. you WANT to be payed, so you do something for it. If you do NOT WANT to get sued, this should not mean you need to do something for it.
"Our holiday was ! We stayed at and it was "
> You don't need tail, and you don't need to point to some particular daemon's separate logfile when using journactl.
> First, the journal contains all logs on the system, so there is no need to hunt around for various logs like "access".
THIS is the problem. journald is your syslog, my favourite program does not use it. and now?
Then imagine, everyone would behave like poettering. Hey, for my favourite program, you need another "view logs" command! And for mine, another, too!
No. Lets keep it textfiles, which can be used with textfile programs.
> The same command on systemd is "journalctl -f" . Notice how you don't need to give a path. Notice that in both instances you need a executable (tail vs journalctl) to view the logs.
And there is the Problem.
File+Minimal Utility -> SystemD specific tool.
The tail command can easily pointed to the next file, i.e.
> That is a perfect description of the tools in systemd.
its not. see your own example.
1) Most Initscripts background themself. If they do not so, they usually have a reason to do so.
2) Daemons can be monitored and will be monitored on a good system. If you want some restart/... facility, DO NOT put it into init (which should init and nothing else), but use something like supervisord
3) It's just not its job and causes more problems, than it solves.
you can just use while true;do sleep 5;program --blocking;done
so, there was tail -f
Unix: Everything is a file, small general purpose tools, which do one thing well.
yeah, more like tail on a logfile than using a *ctl tool. And a initsystem running just a sequence of commands instead of trying to manage daemons in containers
you are telling us systemd is not monolithic, because the tools to control it are not? The thing itself is monolithic. Or can you just use the network part without initsytem und journald?
i do the same using only noscript. there is a setting to disallow flash even on temp / whitelist sites until it's clicked.
The model exists and is called flattr. It does not work that good, i guess for serveral reasons:
- The amount of money you need to spend per month is only 2 Eur
- Initially everyone needed to pay, now you can receive without paying yourself iirc. So they'll have many "i hope i get flattred but do not contribute myself" users.
- They have a "like" Button, which needs thirdparty scripts and so on, so it gets blocked by antitracking addons, noscript, adblock, etc. instead of a browseraddon for the contributing user.
they at least wanted to add click to play. i used flashblock in the past and the noscript-flashblock for a long time by now. konqueror was one of the first browsers with click-to-play function.
ads make you buy products you did not intend to buy. apple.com allows you to buy products you wanted to buy before you even visited the page.
as google text ads are considered not to obstrusive, google would happily degrate sites with many image/flash/... banners
They cannot win. There are more people with the urge to block, than adblocker-blockers.
The best they can get, is to lose the adblocking visitors.
you followed the story about gmx, 1&1 and other united internet services, which called adblock a malware? Except from streisand, they got a very bad reputation in the media as well.