Depends on the program and the professors. I’m doing computer scuence at CSUN, and I’ve gotten lucky, none of the online exams have required any proctoring software (rootkit monitoring software). They just do them in the browser.

I’m pretty sure it’s possible to use timeshift to create backups on another drive using rsync (instead of btrfs). They are incremental, and deduplicated, as well.

But the other commenters are correct, timeshift is not a backup tool, it’s more for snapshots to undo system changes you may not want. In addition to that, it doesn’t do user files by default — because again, it’s not a backup tool.

btrfs send/receive technically does what you want, using btrfs to do backups to another drive, but I don’t think any GUI app supports it. Plus, you would have to create snapshots for btrfs from the command line.

Your best bet are apps explicitly designed for this usecase, like someone mentioned pika, or borg or restic are good choices. They don’t do BTRFS, but they do incremental, deduplicated updates in a user friendly way.

Wasn’t privacytools the original, before they were bought out and the original people moved to privacy guides?

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/about/privacytools/

You’re right, my bad. Dynamic linking and dynamic compilation are different thinks.

The library inter operation is a part of the translation layers that, like fex-emu which is becoming more and more supported by Fedora.

https://github.com/FEX-Emu/FEX/blob/main/ThunkLibs/README.md

manually vetted libraries where you can clean up the ABI

Yes, but usually games are ran with wine which does have a standard set of libraries it uses.

Yes, you can run games. See my other comments in the thread, it’s now possible to use Arm translation to play PC games on android devices.

maybe it’s not as big of a thing as I imagine it being.

Yes, see my other comments in this thread for an explanation of this. The trick is that not all the calls are translated, as wine is able to use the arm version of the libraries rather than the x86 version.

Should be awful for gaming. It’s possible to run x86 things with emulation, sure, but performance (especially single-thread)

Most modern software (games excluded), is dynamically compiled. This means that it’s not all one “bundle” that runs, but rather a binary that calls reusable pieces of code, “libraries” from the binary itself. Wine is dynamically compiled.

What makes modern x86 to arm translators special, is that the x86 binary, like an x86 version of wine, can call upon the arm versions of the libraries it uses ­— like graphic drivers. It’s because of this that the people on r/emulationonandroid managed to play GTA 5 with 30 fps via the computer version. There definitely is overhead, but it’s not that much, and a beefy machine like this could absolutely handle it.

https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/blog/scale-22/#exhibition-hall

The Facebook/Meta table had a booth where they had an ARM macbook that was running steam and they were installing games on it.

ut I honestly doubt ARM can with the overhead of emulation

Most modern software (games excluded), is dynamically compiled. This means that it’s not all one “bundle” that runs, but rather a binary that calls reusable pieces of code, “libraries” from the binary itself. Wine is dynamically compiled.

What makes modern x86 to arm translators special, is that the x86 binary, like an x86 version of wine, can call upon the arm versions of the libraries it uses ­— like graphic drivers. It’s because of this that the people on r/emulationonandroid managed to play GTA 5 with 30 fps via the computer version. There definitely is overhead, but it’s not that much, and a beefy machine like this could absolutely handle it.

https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/blog/scale-22/#exhibition-hall

The Facebook/Meta table had a booth where they had an ARM macbook that was running steam and they were installing games on it.

Yes:

https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/blog/scale-22/#exhibition-hall

The Facebook/Meta table had a booth where they had an ARM macbook that was running steam and they were installing games on it.

I never got uefi images booting properly on those grub multi boot utility drives. Granted the last time I bothered with it was like 10 years ago now

I haven’t had any issues with Ventoy, everything I’ve attempted to boot works. Doesn’t matter how it does it if it works.

They are not explicitly designed to boot ISO’s?

Also, price. I’m not gonna pay quadruple the price for something that can be done entirely in software.

Perhaps Ubuntu already has it already, but some kind of built in tool to make deploying clustered/high availability MariaDB would be nice.

The current problem with ventoy is that proprietary blobs are essentially an unauditable possible security backdoor.

This product is entirely proprietary, including the hardware, and even worse.

Right, but you could have just made one yourself

And then there would be a bus factor of one. It’s not just about making a helm chart for myself, it’s about having something that can be shared with the community, that doesn’t depend on any single person to be maintained and updated.

It’s about having an organization that provides “packages” for Kubernetes, for people/orgs that don’t have the time, expertise, and energy to maintain them.

I greatly respect Ananace, who is in the comments of this post, and mentioned their Helm charts. The work is excellent. But looking through the commits, it’s just one person, doing something that primarily consists of bumping version numbers. Contrast this to the Matrix ESS helm chart, where the commits consist of many more contributors, and also include feature additions to the helm chart.

Hello Ananace! :)

I actually have seen your helm charts many, many times before when searching for matrix, synapse, or lemmy on Artifacthub.

An official helm chart isn’t really a hard requirement to me, even if I were to use one and it were to stop getting maintained, I could continue on my own. But an official helm chart has big community benefits that are very important to me. Like, there becomes the option of paid support, which is a must have for many entities. Also, an official organization may support a wider variety of usecases than someone making helm charts for personal use.

I also ended up chatting with one of the core devs of Synapse about ways to improve regular Python Synapse for use with Kubernetes back in the ending of January, so hopefully it’ll improve in that direction when time allows

Do you know anything about the claims that they have rewritten synapse in rust?

Yes and no. There are many things that are much easier with Kubernetes, once you figure Kubernetes out.

High availability is the most notable example — yes, it’s doable in docker, via something like swarm, but it’s more difficult. In comparison, the ideas of clustering and working with more than one server are central to the architecture of Kubernetes.

Another thing is that long term deployments with Kubernetes can be more maintainable, since everything is just yaml files and version is just a number. If you store your config in code, then it’s easier to replicate it to another server, either internally, or if you share it for other people to use (Helm is somewhat like this).

This helm chart is not just matrix/synapse, but also element (web ui), and “matrix authentication service”, which adds SSO/OIDC support to a normal synapse instance, which is pretty neat. I haven’t seen any helm charts that include the full matrix stack, just separate synapse or element helm charts. And helm definitely makes deploying services to Kubernetes easier than other ways of deploying applications.

The other reason why I like an official helm chart, is because I have seen unofficial one’s be stopped being maintained by the community member(s) maintaining them. With an official one, it will (probably) be maintained indefinitely.

It’s worked fine for me with no configuration. If you ask for help, we can troubleshoot and get it working.

I despise the way Canonical pretends discourse forum posts by their team members* are documentation.

I’ve noticed they have been a bit better lately, and have migrated much of the posts to their documentation, but it seems they are doing it again.

As this is developed, we will update this post to link to the new documentation and feature release notes.

Pro tip: You could have just made the documentation directly, with the content of this post. Or maybe a blog post. But please stop with the forum posts. They are very confusing for people not used to these… unique locations.

*Not that people are easily able to find this out when they don’t give any indication that the forum post is something other than just another post by a rando. Actually, I’m just guessing here, based on the quoted reply, for all I know this could be a post by someone unrelated to Canonical. The account is 3 months, and the post itself is identical to a regular forum post from a regular forum member…

It actually is a language issue.

Although rust can dynamically link with C/C++ libraries, it cannot dynamically link with other Rust libraries. Instead, they are statically compiled into the binary itself.

But the GPL interacts differently with static linking than with dynamic. If you make a static binary with a GPL library or GPL code, your program must be GPL. If you dynamically link a GPL library, you’re program doesn’t have to be GPL. It’s partially because of this, that the vast majority of Rust programs and libraries are permissively licensed — to make a GPL licensed rust library would mean it would see much less use than a GPL licensed C library, because corporations wouldn’t be able to extend proprietary code off of it — not that I care about that, but the library makers often do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Libraries — it’s complicated.

EDIT: Nvm I’m wrong. Rust does allow dynamic linking

Hmmmm. But it seems that people really like to compile static rust binaries, however, due to their portability across Linux distros.

EDIT2: Upon further research it seems that Rust’s dynamic linking implementation lacks a “stable ABI” as compared to other languages such as Swift or C. So I guess we are back to “it is a language issue”. Well thankfully this seems easier to fix than “Yeah Rust doesn’t support dynamic linking at all.”

Edit3: Nvm, I’m very, very wrong. The GPL does require programs using GPL libraries, even dynamically linked, be GPL. It’s the LGPL that doesn’t.