101–110 of 138 posts
Who thought this was a good idea? Is there any actual documentation on this or is it just a thing they added?
Isn’t this almost certainly a bug? I’m pretty sure the MacOS developers don’t really want to add a .s extension to files.
How is this passing QA? Did no one try to save a file during the whole beta?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The user agent is defined by the browser. And it only contains: Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7 irrespective of what Mac you are using.
I’m seeing Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 14_7). What do you think the 14_7 stands for on MacOS 14.7?
This is on an M4 MacBook Pro running 15.0.
So not correct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe I’m getting old, but my long time preference for Arch is slowly being overtaken by my appreciation for Debian. It’s not the usual complaint about stability — I’ve had one issue in a dozen years with Arch — I just reached a point where I feel like I’m living in the future running Linux software from five years ago, so maybe I don’t need to upgrade quite so relentlessly. Anything I don’t have, I can compile.
What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it re…
Aren’t Debian and Arch philosophic opposites though? Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone, Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Seems odd to jump from one end of the spectrum to another (I use Debian and Mint mostly but have respect for the Arch project’s aims)
What were you doing with Arch where you had this experience? I’ve been using it for more than ten years on a variety of hardware and everything has always just worked, but I see this complaint a lot and I’m confused about where it comes from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it re…
Aren’t Debian and Arch philosophic opposites though? Arch is bleeding edge yet permanently issue prone, Debian is stable and conservative/slow in updating? Seems odd to jump from one end of the spectrum to another (I use Debian and Mint mostly but have respect for the Arch project’s aims)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Debian has nailed in the last 10 years is the package management situation that is so smooth. This is why I’m leaving Arch, everything breaks sometimes or a dep won’t upgrade for this or that reason. Debian you install and the package probably has a pretty good initial config and works. Any packages that aren’t recent enough can be built usually because the toolchain versions are probably recent enough. So it re…
I always have such a difficult time messing with packages on debian. On arch, there is a single PKGBUILD file, and it's basically the simplest thing anyone could think of which makes it bliss to work with. On the other hand, debian/rules is a complete mess, apt-get update is notoriously slow, and I have not had good experiences with dpkg-buildpackage compared to makepkg.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't "require" it. Users might enable it or disable it. If it's disabled, can you explain to me how is it safer?
Gmail can require 2FA more or less at google's whim, regardless of user preferences (and if you don't have a method set up, you'll be locked out of logging in, at least through that particular device/connection)
I will never understand how a bunch of technically-inclined people can look at an obvious bug and think it was put in intentionally.
It bonkers isnt it! Do none of Apple's developer team use any other editor at anytime other than XCode! How was this not picked up in beta testing!? Here's another gripe: The tiling feature maddens me! You cant disable it completely or remap the key bindings. Did anyone at Apple even test this using a full size Magic Keyboard? Using the FN key to move windows is fine when the key is down next to the Control key. Whic…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gmail can require 2FA more or less at google's whim, regardless of user preferences (and if you don't have a method set up, you'll be locked out of logging in, at least through that particular device/connection)
It can require it if it is enabled . Which is not mandatory .
(see this for example: https://support.google.com/mail/thread/14768952/how-to-turn-...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always have such a difficult time messing with packages on debian. On arch, there is a single PKGBUILD file, and it's basically the simplest thing anyone could think of which makes it bliss to work with. On the other hand, debian/rules is a complete mess, apt-get update is notoriously slow, and I have not had good experiences with dpkg-buildpackage compared to makepkg.
Really? I have had package manager failing experiences since I installed Arch. About 1-3 times per month yay will fail requiring me to use pacman to update. Once I run pacman I can run yay to update my AUR deps when the selling point of yay is that it’s a completely pacman-compatible interface. It’s package situation is so fuzzy though that the community actively encourages you to install multiple package managers. T…
Personably I started using Arch because of its excellent Wiki, after three Fedora updates in a row failed on me and I found myself over and over in the Arch Wiki getting answers.