> On Sep 22, 2017, at 5:45 AM, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:35:26AM +0200, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
>>> go is not suckless.
>>>
>>> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>>
>> Does C magically solve my design problem?
>> At PoC stage, implementation lan
> On Sep 22, 2017, at 2:00 AM, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> go is not suckless.
Why not? I don't see the issue with go for occasional use or security critical
applications. Is go hard to maintain?
> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>
> --
> Sylvain
>
I've compiled 9base against musl, and dd spits errors about memory at
me if I try to invoke it. I looked at the source and determined sbrk
wasn't doing what it was supposed to. I don't know if this is to do
with my version of musl, or just musl in general, but I replaced sbrk
with malloc and it see
I use a modified version of the Gobo hierarchy (pretty much just
keeping programs in /Programs and symlinking them to root), and I
think it's a definite improvement on using a package manager or
installing to root. It's stupid simple to set up, the shell script I
use to symlinking everything is ~20
Are there any XOrg implementations that aren't a pain to compile? I've
heard people complain about wayland but I haven't heard any good
reason as to why it's actually bad, so I'm considering just going with
that if it's less of a pain.
Hell, I'd be fine with acme or sam on frame buffer if that's possible.
On 7/1/17, Rendov Norra wrote:
> Are there any XOrg implementations that aren't a pain to compile? I've
> heard people complain about wayland but I haven't heard any good
> reason a
CSS+HTML+a user can implement rule 110 [0]. Key part is the user,
since CSS cannot iterate rule 110 on its own. This is not to say that
HTML/CSS is exempt from criticism, just that javascript is far worse
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2497146/is-css-turing-complete
On 6/12/17, Calvin Morris
/www.wikicreole.org/wiki/Creole1.0
> [8] http://plantuml.com/salt
>
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Rendov Norra wrote:
> > I fail to see how remote arbitrary code execution is a feature. Maybe
> > I'm missing something.
> >
> > I suppose in essence it would
I fail to see how remote arbitrary code execution is a feature. Maybe
I'm missing something.
I suppose in essence it would suck less in that there'd be fewer APIs,
but you'll just get the same lazy code and bloat that most software
exhibits, but with the ease of visiting a webpage.
On 6/10/17, Lo
Reading the source code, it seems that error represents any failure
from mount(). It seems overlayfs wasn't compiled with my kernel.
Seems like unionfs isn't supported unless I'm missing something. Mount
complains about "union" not being a file or device it can mount.
Since—according to the official documentation [1]—the directories to
mount are supposed to be given as options, mount refuses to do
anything.
[1]
https://git.ker
11 matches
Mail list logo
