ecnahc515

Isn't most of our current understanding of how life on earth came to be (eg: primordial soup, hydrothermal vents, etc), natural evolution, all basically "just statistics"? They all require the correct "setup" (time, location, etc), but in a large enough universe, it's _statistically_ likely (mediocrity principle) and "just statistics" again, right?

Well uv runs on many systems and most don't have filesystem level dedupe configured, unfortunately.

Anyways it can be both? It could let the filesystem handle it if it detected the FS has file or block dedupe and fallback to hardlinks otherwise. It doesn't but that could be done if it showed it was worth it.

Notice rules are ordered. You don't optimize until you know you need it. They started with a data structure they though would be fine. Clearly it was fine since it worked and they decided it was later worth optimizing.

Because it would be slower and have different scaling requirements than the ones they want.

LSP isn't used for syntax highlights usually, that's still the job of the editor. This is where something like treesitter usually comes in. LSP is only used in this case for errors/annotations/etc.

I've been impacted by this particular "issue" and while it's changing the way "decades of convention" it's not really a bad thing imo. Running things via screen and tmux as a solution to background tasks has always been a huge hack imo. Not only that but the alternative approaches with nohup and disown also have their own issues. Imo it's actually pretty reasonable to need to work work the OS service manager to run background tasks, even with tmux and screen.

> The problem with systemd is that it's purposefully designed to be a viral monolith

Is it though?

Systemd is a project, not just a piece of software. It's got a lot of libraries that are reused across the different components that the systemd project ships. It's not that different from how most C/C++ projects have their own standard library built on top of stdlib/boost/etc. Any new "systemd project" could be done as a completely standalone piece of software, but it would mean recreating a lot of the libraries that already exist.

The biggest piece of coupling to systemd isn't really specifically systemd itself but how systems rely on how systemd does certain things, namely, cgroups. No one wants to manage cgroups themselves, so they use systemd to start services and put them into the cgroup hierarchy, etc. This is exactly one reason desktop environments "rely on systemd" (among others).

Why does everyone want to use cgroups (and thus systemd)? Because it makes managing groups of processes easier, which is directly tied to handling user sessions, which as it turns out, is something most applications want, since typically they deal with users!

Now, systemd's own sub-projects, (eg appd), are likely to be yet another consumer of systemd for similar reasons.

Using systemd, and building on top of it makes it much easier to implement features without having to do everything yourself.

Seems like the enactor should be checking the version/generation of the current record before it applies the new value, to ensure it never applies an old plan on top of an record updated by a new plan. It wouldn't be as efficient, but that's just how it is. It's a basic compare and swap operation, so it could be handled easily within dynamodb itself where these records are stored.

Also it's pretty likely it took less time than that to get an idea, but generally for public updates you want to be very reserved, otherwise users get the wrong impressions.

Sure they definitely were using Docker for their own applications, but also dotCloud was itself a PaaS, so they were trying to compete with Heroku and similar offerings, which had buildpacks.

The problem is/was that buildpacks aren't as flexible and only work if the buildpack exists for your language/runtime/stack.

Ah right, wrong linter. Thanks for confirming!

If the the OP is the author, did consider filing a bug with errcheck? It should be possible for errcheck to check if the comparison is being done within an `Is(err error) bool` method and skip the warning in that case, or even better: it could check if your using `errors.Is` within an `Is` method and warn in that case!

Cronjobs often run as root. If the host has is configured to send emails when a cronjob is completed it will default to sending it to user@domain where the user is the user the cronjob runs as, and the domain is what was configured in the cron configuration.

Instead it requires QEMU!