|
|
It took a couple months, but I was finally able to adapt my workflow to more-or-less work with the “GNOME Way”
This is most certainly not the way software should work.
Basically, having read to the end of the article, although it doesn't say it explicitly and I thought the article was about Gnome from the summary, it can be summed up in one of Linus's short phrases: "Use KDE".
Sounds like the guy was just frustrated and venting. Lots of us do that sometimes, and this one seems ready made to please the slashdot crowd. But do read the retraction the guy posted.
No, it wasn't venting and no it wasn't there to please the Slashdot crowd. People are at their most truthful when they go off-the-cuff, and this was most definitely off-the-cuff. The hasty attempt at a half-retraction tells you that. He's bang on regarding systemd, however.
As for the the speed I agree it looks a bit suspicious but given some of the other issues that have occured with the software I wonder if the speed registered in the logs is the same speed that was shown on the speedometer.
That's a bit desperate to be perfectly honest.
It was, well, parts of the plot, the script, and that weasely little fellow who wore black leather was swinging in the trees with the monkeys.
Errr, yer. Basically anything that George Lucas came up with. I have a feeling that Speilberg was somewhat less than happy with the outcome with Lucas and there will be absolutely no other Indiana Jones films. Ever.
My guess would be that the DOJ has already thoroughly investigated secure boot
ROTFL.
UEFI has nothing to do with Microsoft, even Secure Boot isn't a Microsoft thing and this story doesn't have anything to do with Secure Boot anyway...nice attempt to drag this topic into another M$ Windoze bash-fest though.
Yer, that's why the first key in any EFI system is not Microsoft's and other OS builders are not having to go to Microsoft to get their keys signed. Oh wait........
No - the above poster wrote "don't use passwords". Taken at face value that sounds like recommending not to encrypt your private key with a password - because that would mean "using a password" - thus bad advice.
No, it doesn't. Everyone with half a brain regarding SSH should know what 'not using passwords' with SSH means - and it doesn't mean *not* using a pass 'phrase' for your SSH key. He never said that. I'm afraid your splitting hairs here to have something to say.
No - that is called reading between the lines, adding something that is not there and making an assumption that somebody that doesn't know better will not make - thus it doesn't change that the post above is bad advice.
No. You have totally misunderstood the post, and please don't tie yourself in knots like that. It was very clear what he wrote and you were the one who added in 'I think a password is a very good idea if combined with a key'. It's also not called a 'password' but a 'passphrase'. It is not his fault that you or others don't know what he's talking about.
This makes no sense. Once somebody has root and can write to those binaries you are already fucked and they can change access to anything they like, and then write over it to their hearts content.
Quite right. Binaries are already write protected from users but if you're root you can do anything.
Old mail has arrived.