no you wont

it didnt work sadly. all i got was a blank screen

edit: actually i think i got it right this time, i just needed to format it as an empty partition on gparted. brb edit 2: nope. blank screen again (even though the dd’d partition got recognized by gparted this time)

maybe just making a new folder on the USB’s root and putting stuff in there would suffice? i typically dd the iso to the usb drive, so thats sadly not possible

wrt ventoy, ive been avoiding it given some security concerns that were raised a while ago: https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/issues/2795

i thought about doing that, but i wasnt sure if that would get recognized as a bootable device (especially on my pc which is still has a bios instead of uefi). ill test it and come back to say if it worked or not

I don’t have the exact numbers with me right now but according to systemd-analyze

before: ~3min

after removing snapd and docker: 1min 50s

i’m not doubting anything after i heard they snapified kernel modules

the official slack package for linux is a snap. the flatpak one is not official and it has a number of issues, especially on wayland. luckly, there’s also a beta deb package available, so i’m using that

but i believe snap will only become less able to compete with flatpak as time passes

systemd isn’t a pid1; systemd-init is

i don’t have an issue with multiple flatpak repos. i’d actually find it very interesting if we went a more decentralized route with flatpak (maybe kde, gnome, mozzila would each have their own repos). but i don’t see the point of a distro-specific flatpak when we already have normal packages. compatibility is kind of a non-issue, since you’re not supposed to install them elsewhere anyway (unlike flatpaks)

also, i see absolutely no reason to use fedora’s flatpak repo on debian given that flathub exists already. you could add it if you want it, but what’s the point?

sounds weird to me. aren’t we replicating the repository problem if each distro decides to make a flatpak repo according to their own philosophies?

didn’t read the article, but i never got the point of having a distro-specific flathub repo. isn’t being distro-agnostic the main thing about flatpaks?

i’ve seen this story being posted so many times over the years and every time it’s such a good read

cool article

which makes me wonder why there are people who still avoid systemd. i get that alpine can’t use glibc, but what about everyone else? i just see vague statements about systemd being “too big” or going “against unix philosophy”, but never concrete disadvantages of systemd compared to other pid-1s

edit: also, i wonder how viable would it be to port systemd to musl or whatever alpine uses so that they can take advantage of it