rom1v

Joined 11 years ago

Karma
2,087
Submissions
186
Member since
Jun 23
https://blog.rom1v.com
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 1 month ago
They have to use one key per app, otherwise independent app could end up sharing some permissions (IIRC).
Comment · 1 month ago
In addition to F-Droid on the device, I'd love an F-Droid "package manager client" on a computer, that allows installing apps on an Android device via adb:

    # update repo lists
    fdr update
    
    # upgrade all apps on the connected device
    fdr upgrade
    
    # search packages
    fdr search vlc  # lists org.videolan.vlc
    
    # install on the device
    fdr install org.mozilla.firefox
    
    # download the apk
    fdr download org.mozilla.firefox
    
    # uninstall
    fdr uninstall org.mozilla.firefox 
Of course, all operations would verify the signatures first.
Comment · 1 month ago
"I play the piano" or "I play piano"?
Comment · 3 months ago
> `git history fixup` fixes an old commit that has something wrong in it, then autorebases all your branches to match.

Simplifying `git rebase -i` is a great idea, but unfortunately, that does not match my workflow.

I always keep an history of my branches. For example, when I develop a feature, the first version of the branch is `myfeature.1`, then `myfeature.2`, and so on. This is useful because I can retrieve an old version when something behaves differently in a newer one. (And no, `git reflog` will not help)

This has saved me multiple times. For example, I can determine that a problem was introduced between `myfeature.58` and `myfeature.59`. If the "feature" contains 15 commits, I do:

    git range-diff myfeature.58~15..myfeature.58 myfeature.59~15..myfeature.59
This lets me see the changes between the 2 versions, commit by commit (even if they don't have the same base).

I don't want all the branches containing a commit to be rebased automatically (I already try using tags for old versions instead, but this does not quite fit).

Comment · 4 months ago
Comment · 4 months ago
> The difference in the code is exactly one word: value.

What is unclear to me is why the decision to use a Point instance as a value or as a reference is made in the class definition rather than by the caller.

> Point[] point = new Point[10];

For the same class, I might need an array of values in one place and an array of references elsewhere within the same codebase.

Comment · 4 months ago
Related to the discussion: "A fork() in the road": https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...

> ABSTRACT

> The received wisdom suggests that Unix’s unusual combination of fork() and exec() for process creation was an inspired design. In this paper, we argue that fork was a clever hack for machines and programs of the 1970s that has long outlived its usefulness and is now a liability. We catalog the ways in which fork is a terrible abstraction for the modern programmer to use, describe how it compromises OS implementations, and propose alternatives.

> As the designers and implementers of operating systems, we should acknowledge that fork’s continued existence as a first-class OS primitive holds back systems research, and deprecate it. As educators, we should teach fork as a historical artifact, and not the first process creation mechanism students encounter.

Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
--keep-active ;)
Comment · 5 months ago
Please post a link to the issue.
Comment · 11 months ago
I want to be able to install apps from alternative app stores like F-Droid and receive automatic updates, without requiring Google's authorization for app publication.

Manually installing an app via adb must, of course, be permitted. But that is not sufficient.

> Keeping users safe on Android is our top priority.

Google's mandatory verification is not about security, but about control (they want to forbid apps like ReVanced that could reduce their advertising revenue).

When SimpleMobileTools was sold to a shady company (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38505229), the new owner was able to push any user-hostile changes they wanted to all users who had installed the original app through Google Play (that's the very reason why the initial app could be sold in the first place, to exploit a large, preexisting user base that had the initial version installed).

That was not the case on F-Droid, which blocked the new user-hostile version and recommended the open source fork (Fossify Apps). (see also this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45410805)

Comment · 1 year ago
Are the years intended to be read in octal?
Comment · 1 year ago
> One of the most important themes we hear from the developer community is the need for more lead time to adapt to changes

No, it's not.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton