Guacamole has changed the way I use my computer. My main monitor is a 24" 1920x1200 (16:10) screen. It now has a browser maximized on it all day long.
I used to have to switch back and forth between the browser window and my terminal window. Now I've got HTML, SSH, RDP, and VNC in one contiguous set of tabs. And since I'm at 1920x1200, I can view a remote 1920x1080 screen without scaling it down, in those cases where the server won't size to the client's screen dimensions.
Text windows are 190x56, which is a *little* excessive, but not so much that I want to shrink them. Nobody writes code in 80 columns anymore, except maybe COBOL programmers.
Obviously this isn't going to transform everyone's workflow, but it's working great for me. Nearly everything I do is on a remote computer somewhere.
HOW MANY FUCKING SERVICE MANAGERS DOES LINUX REQUIRE?
Whenever someone else thinks, "None of these really start my services how I'd like them started... I think I'll make another one," an angel has its wings ripped uncermoniously out of their torso in agony.
Just Fucking Stop It Already.
Oh, that's a gem:
"Note that when openrc-init is used, it must be paired with openrc-shutdown, and *not* the shutdown or reboot commands from other packages, otherwise you will encounter errors."
So not only have you introduced yet another monstrosity for people maintaining setups to ensure, but you're imposing on system administrators who have developed muscle memory for shutdown/reboot a need to remember the oh-so-much-shorter command "openrc-shutdown" because your system is that much better.
It seems as if there was a largely held consensus that sysvinit was aging and had become a liability, since so many different parties have built replacements for it. I guess I'm one of those heretic type people, because I actually like systemd. So I simply hope that eventually we reach a point where systemd becomes the category-killer sysvinit replacement and we can count on it being there. For all practical purposes, ISV's who actually produce software instead of rolling craft beer distributions of Linux in their spare time, only care about Fedora (CentOS, Red Hat) and Debian (Ubuntu). Since both of those lines have already moved to systemd, the debate is essentially over.
Also, I still consider Pluto a real planet.
I kinda don't care what system is used, as long as I don't have to write a ridiculous amount of code to cover all of them.
(Although, upstart earned a place in my spleen for really making things difficult when it was semi-released before being quite ready).
Yeah, well, Ubuntu has tried a bunch of different things to make themselves non-standard. Most of them (Upstart and Unity are two examples) have failed.
It seems they're now making the switch from X11 to Wayland in the current version. Let's see how that works out. It should be interesting.
Heh... I guess they want to be trendsetters, but lack the credentials.
there. For all practical purposes, ISV's who actually produce
software instead of rolling craft beer distributions of Linux in
their spare time, only care about Fedora (CentOS, Red Hat) and Debian
CoreOS might be much more common soon
So not only does CoreOS use systemd, but they have leveraged it as the framework for initializing and running containers.
It seems there's no additional problem here if CoreOS does become more common.
My requirements are few:
* Offsite backups of my primary servers, which sit in a remote data center
* DLNA server, to serve audio and video to devices around the home
* Periodically update my dynamic DNS (my router doesn't support afraid.org)
While installing the OS, I was reminded how much I liked netbooks so much more than tablets. And when I booted up the 2009-era Linux that was previously installed on it, I was reminded how much better the GUI's were before *everyone* collectively decided to make everything ugly and unusable.
The netbook was a good choice because it has a low-power processor (an Atom), and I already had it so the cost was $0. Previously I was using a Raspberry Pi, but it kept crashing for some reason. I'm still not sure why.
[ http://tinyurl.com/amazon-is-hitler ]
Recent moves by Amazon suggest that they are preparing to ditch the Xen hypervisor and move to KVM.
The new hypervisor was mentioned in the release notes for a new "C5" instance type which is powered by Intel "Skylake" processors. (Read notes here: [ http://tinyurl.com/die-bezos-die ]). They go on to mention that "going forward, web'll use this hypervisor to power other instance types."
Although Amazon is bad, Amazon using KVM is good. The KVM hypervisor is really, really good. It's less cumbersome than Xen, makes more sense in the way it allocates resources using existing Linux facilities, and still manages to be a Type 1 hypervisor even though it shares memory management and other functions with the host OS's userland.
It will be interesting to see if Xen withers and dies at this point.
Amazon will have to continue using Xen for many years to come, because they are committed to supporting paravirt-based images on most of their existing instance types.
I don't think we're talking about the same thing. Amazon is committed to supporting what they call PVM-based AMIs, which as I understand it are Xen-based paravirt kernels that predate pv-ops and don't have the ability to boot as HVM, bare-metal, dom0 etc (all of which are supported by recent pv-ops) or else there would be no point to any distinction between PVM and HVM AMIs
Yes, that is a bit different. I still think they could shim it out and make it run under KVM if they really wanted to, but it's probably easier for them to just cap those instance types and let them age out. In the hosting business we generally don't upgrade customers who have already paid unless they are ready to pay us again.
it gets a bit tricky because all of EC2 Classic has to "age out"... tht might eventually happen but the entire world has to migrate off first