Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

syncthing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 233 posts

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#181

Post by vetinari »

rkagerer wrote: post #150
hparadiz wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a GO runtime setting. Has nothing to do with Syncthing.

I'm not a Go programmer, but couldn't they achieve the same thing without name collision by reading a custom environment variable at startup and setting runtime.GOMAXPROCS?

Why would they do it?

This setting is managed by Go runtime, and Go runtime defines a specific env var for customization. If you want different setting for different Go programs, no problem, it is not a global config, but per process, so set the env var to desired value only for syncthing process.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#182

Post by lamontcg »

miki123211 wrote: post #136

I have to pitch Resilio Sync (formerly Bittorrent Sync) here. It's a proprietary, more polished alternative that offers a freeware license for personal use. My biggest issue with Syncthing was that there was no auto-discovery, if you had 25 or so computers across a group of friends, you needed to set up 25^2 connections, which wasn't really feasible. Not sure if this is still a thing, but Resilio solves this perfectl…

Used Resilio for a long time and it would constantly start to beachball on my Macs. Syncthing has been pretty flawless by comparison.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#183

Post by dolni »

djbusby wrote: post #158
dolni wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and by god, if a better solution is so obvious to you, why haven't you proposed it yet, or - god forbid - made a merge/pull request?? Because there isn't any obligation to? Why do you think you would be entitled to ask for that?

Aren't they just suggesting to open a bug/issue in place of complaining on HN? Seems a fair, small ask to me.

There is a discussion being had. This guy was sharing his opinion about syncthing. That still doesn't obligate him to open a bug or do any work for the project.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#184

Post by willis936 »

spicybright wrote: post #172
willis936 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'll just have to pay $49.99 a year for iCloud! Why isn't this a lawsuit yet?

Lawsuit for what? Not providing an API for a feature you want? It's not like Apple specifically advertised background services, then lied about it. The device is specifically built like that, and you can buy a different phone if it's that big of an issue. It feels like complaining your toaster doesn't have a dark enough toast setting that you want. Is there a lawsuit in that?

For engaging in anti-competitive behavior. Forcing a single App Store on an os is much less draconian than offering a broken interface to basic OS functionality in order to prop your own product above others. Imagine if Windows downclocked whenever you wanted to use an office alternative. This is not much different.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#185

Post by laurentlbm »

dspillett wrote: post #105
zibzab wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you use termux and backup from its storage?

Since recent Android updates my termux setup hasn't been able to access other application's data. I use rsync via that for backing up content, it still works for things like camera output, but not things like the files & config from my podcast app. Though it turns out I've been negligent and not noticed the Play installed versions are no longer maintained, so they may have worked around whatever the issue is. I must…

I can confirm that the F-Droid version has fixed this issue a while ago.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#186

Post by dolni »

mPReDiToR wrote: post #161
dolni wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and by god, if a better solution is so obvious to you, why haven't you proposed it yet, or - god forbid - made a merge/pull request?? Because there isn't any obligation to? Why do you think you would be entitled to ask for that?

"Entitled to ask"? I think freedom of speech allows for it. Can I have a million pounds, from you personally, please? Also, that might be the small nudge which potentially has a user actually contribute in some circumstances. I'm not sure your question is fair.

Perhaps "entitled to ask" is a poor choice of words. Yes, freedom of speech allows bipson to ask about contributing. It still comes across as entitled. The question was clearly laden with some expectation that Reventlov should go do work for syncthing instead of sharing an opinion on Hacker News.

We're just here having a conversation. The expectation that a user MUST do something for an open source project because they have an issue is a tired take. It's not as though Reventlov is blowing up Syncthing's development team with demands about how to make it better. And, for all any of us know, Reventlov may have already submitted PRs or opened issues for Syncthing. Or, it could be the case that there's a different piece of software suiting their needs better, and that's fine. Or, Reventlov maybe just doesn't possess the technical skill to contribute in that way. And that's okay too.

Bludgeoning people with an open source virtue-stick for sharing an opinion isn't helpful.

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#187

Post by MikusR »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #176
MikusR wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Syncthing has many options for versioning. Ability to keep versions of files is THE reason I use it.

https://docs.syncthing.net/users/faq.html?highlight=backup#i...

https://docs.syncthing.net/users/versioning.html

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#189

Post by OriginalPenguin »

rkagerer wrote: post #118

Glad to see another option out there for file sync. Browsing the FAQ I noticed: To further limit the amount of CPU used when syncing and scanning, set the environment variable GOMAXPROCS to the maximum number of CPU cores Syncthing should use Are they using an environment variable shared by other Go programs? Seems like bad practice... why aren't they using a variable or or switch that's unique to Syncthing instead?

If you want to set it just for syncthing, just type this when you run it from the command line:

GOMAXPROCS=2 syncthing

Re: Syncthing – a continuous file synchronization program

#190

Post by libeclipse »

hparadiz wrote: post #124
j1elo wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Commercial products usually aim to satisfy its paying customer's needs. FOSS is, not always but most times, about satisfying one's own needs. So it won't be that easy to change a developer's mind who is determined about their way of doing things even if it is not the best way for others.

It's also kind of arrogant of FOSS advocates to say "just make a pull request" whenever there's criticism of anything FOSS. You could spend weeks working on something only to have the maintainer say no and I've seen this happen and every time it does I just think to myself "welp there's another person who will never make another pull request again".

Then fork it? No one is stopping you.

I assume you don't care about missing out on updates since that's the free work you're complaining about

Post reply on HN