Isn't Linux still Linux even though probably a lot of the original code is gone? Why would slowly rewriting it whole, or just parts, in Rust make it stop being Linux?
Yes I agree but the solution for a project so big and critical is not to fork. How do you maintain all of it while at the same time adding support to Rust?
This is such a dumb take.
For as much as I'd like to have a safer language in the kernel you need the current developers, the "big heads" at least because they have a lot of niche knowledge about their domains and how they implementation works (regardless of language) People shouldn't take shit like this from the ext4 developer, but it doesn't mean we should start vilifying all of them.
This guy's concerns are real and valid but were expressed with the maturity of a lunatic child, but they are not all like this.
Can you explain how a booster that flew 23 times is a loss when no other companies are doing it? I don't like Musk but people need to separate their views of him from SpaceX
Better in what ways? Rust's strong points are not to just make a program more stable, but more secure from a memory standpoint and I don't think Linux keeps improving on that
I don't believe for a single instance that what he says is going to happen, this is just a play for funding... But if it were to happen I'm pretty sure most companies would hire anything that moves for those jobs. You have many examples of companies offloading essential parts of their products externally.
I've also seen companies hiring tourism graduates (et al non engineering related) giving them a 3/4 week programming course, slapping a "software engineer" sticker on them and off they are to work on products they have no experience to work on. Then it's up to senior engineers to handle all that crap.
I can't understand Logseq, even though it seems appealing. I haven't gone too deep yet but to me it feels weird that they say it's simple and then their documentation is confusing and full of videos explaining how it works. That seems far from simple.
Sorry I'm not very eloquent and failed to explain myself:
What I see is that the requested "versions" don't match when the request is made through jellyseer vs when made directly from one of the Arr.
I first noticed this when requesting through jellyseer and I'd see a file with very few peers. Then I'd do an interactive search in the respective Arr (by hand) and there were much better candidates
I'll use this topic to ask a question about jellyseer if you don't mind.
I have jellyfin, jellyseer and arr stack for my Linux ISOs. The issue is when one someone requests an ISO from jellyseer it never is the best choice in terms of peers. I can check this by doing interactive search on one of arr and seeing there was a better choice for the quality I setup. Perhaps I have some misconfiguration?
Not sure about java, but I migrated a fairly big c++ project knowing only the basics of Bazel. Disclaimer: I know the codebase extremely well and we don't have any third party dependencies and the code is c++ and some python generators, validators, etc (which fits the bill for Bazel perfectly)
What I found super hard were toolchains. It's very verbose to define a toolchain
Is it a lie though?