Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | riedel's commentslogin

it is good if people actually develop good workflows. Actually in applied research/public gov tech we are seeing tons of different gitlab instances.

One project we are contributingto the Fraunhofer team developing it has had an internal gitlab with CI/CD and mirrors at three different sites: gitlab.com, opencode.de and code.europa.eu . Now they are slowly trying to move to gitlab.com for the main repo as they cannot open their own repo enough for security/legal reasons. However, the CI/CD stuff still only runs on their gitlab.

Now we have our own gitlab instance we, were we are doing some small frontend work as part of a funded project on national level and have a mirror on GitHub for visibility reasons. Now we have another EU funded project that has its CI/CD on another gitlab instance at a partner. All come with their own onboarding and federated IDM quirks.

It is a total mess. While git is certainly distributed, the workflow is a mess. You end up cherrypicking CI/CD configs and divergent features all over the place.

I wonder: Is there a l'meta-forge' that just would handle rebasing?

I actually understand people using bare git workflow with mailing lists. However, even for me the learning curve and necessary attention span/social contracts is too much a challenge.


I could not even find a mention what platform it supports. There is a Linux example on the bottom. Have never seem a libc implementation that does not even mention for which platforms it is meant.

> sp.h is written in C99, and it compiles against any compiler and libc imaginable. It works on Linux, on Windows, on macOS. It works under a WASM host. It works in the browser. It works with MSVC, and MinGW, it works with or without libc, or with weird ones like Cosmopolitan. It works with the big compilers and it works with TCC.

It...is not a libc implementation. That's an impressive level of misunderstanding!

The title says 'standard library'. Are you saying that, in the context of C, that it is an error to take that to mean an implementation of libc?

Yes, I know the author's writeup then goes on to say that it is not a libc with a pile of questionable justfication. This is a custom runtime, in a single header no less, which is admittedly impressive, especially considering it provides runtime and thread safety primitives. This does not rise to the level of claiming the idea of a 'standard libarary' though, IMO. In that, I think the author misses the point.


You could, of course, spend 30 seconds look at the code on Github which you would have to do if you were interested in using it anyway?

  TRIPLES = \
    x86_64-linux-none x86_64-linux-gnu x86_64-linux-musl \
    aarch64-linux-none aarch64-linux-gnu aarch64-linux-musl \
    aarch64-macos \
    x86_64-windows-gnu \
    wasm32-freestanding wasm32-wasi
Or you could actually try the compliance suite on an architecture and report back to us if it works?

You've rejected a user. You can't complain that he has no interest in your project at that point. The bridge is burned.

I don't know how the author would feel. But, honestly, for a libc replacement, I'd personally be okay with that ...

If you can't be bothered to look at a Makefile (or ask an AI to look at the Makefile), you are almost certain to be more trouble than any possible benefit you will bring.

Especially in the realm of open source, I'm becoming increasingly comfortable with "If you can't be bothered to jump through even the most minimal of hoops, please get lost."


People are very silly and very entitled. I'd bend over backward to help anyone contribute to or use the library in any way. In response, all I ask is for some common courtesy and friendliness. Spending more than exactly zero seconds on people who won't give you that is a waste of time.

In other words, you hit the nail on the head. Anyone who acts this way can get fucked! We'll be having a good time and making friends without them


Same here: was not able to get past the captchas anymore.

Just turn off JS

If I do that the recaptcha does not appear, but that's pretty much it. Still stuck on the 'one more step page'.

Im on mobile

Actually here in Germany that the favourite use for our old yellow boxes, many have become book sharing hubs.

Actually that is mostly current HW compat. NetBSD would be I guess the one for legacy HW compat.

OpenBSD does support some older hardware already not supported by, say, most Linux distributions. As an example MacPPC has’t had support from most Linux distributors since IBM Power went little-endian, but OpenBSD runs fine on it.

NetBSD is, however, the gold standard for an OS that runs on just about anything. Their (maybe unofficial) slogan has been “Of course it runs NetBSD!”. Their logo has a flag in it because they “plant their flag” on so many platforms.

https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/


If they sell one with a track point I might consider switching.

The way you can phrase it: you may jsut get people that are happy to do a good job for the pay they get. In many areas your typical white/cis/hetero/neurotypical male is not present, because you cannot get the maximum reward for their well-trained ego. I think diversity/pay is pretty munch confounded for plausible reasons.

That's saying the white/cis/hetero male is absent because ego demands more reward. Exactly. Diversity fills that gap at lower cost. That's my point, or a counter?

The scheme's motive is the overall effect. Lower wages. It doesn't care about white hetero, or black trans who happen to participate in paralympics.


I am actually only switching to Chromium based browsers because some corps and most notably some captcha/paywalls don't work as expected. But the. I always think I made the right choice (actually I am rather using Zen because I love their UX on top of FF)

Many university HPC clusters are run multiuser. At least login nodes.

Any university or national HPC system as I'd understand the term is multi-user.

There are also things like the extensive high energy physics WLCG compute federation, which is somewhat different, but can potentially be compromised quickly at large scale. For the original copy-fail we didn't want to drain our WLCG Alma9 cluster, or just kill all the jobs like the university HPC system. We got eBPF mitigation in place within a couple of hours, relieved the exploit signature wasn't in logs from the night before. That would have been done earlier if Proofpoint hadn't bounced the forwarded oss-security article as "contains malware"; sigh.


Do you still remember hotbot's color scheme? I guess back in the days we all were brave and less boring.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: