Which IRC client integrates seamlessly with a bouncer
Pretty much any client
such that scrolling to the top of the scrollback automatically requests past messages from the bouncer and integrates them into the scrollback?
Any why would you want this oddly specific and useless mechanism? Why does the scrollback have to be requested on demand? Sounds like you're also a friend of infinite scrolling on the web.
Good luck reliably DCCing from one NAT to another, especially for users behind an ISP that applies carrier grade NAT to all home subscribers. And good luck DCCing when the user who sent the file is offline.
Yes, nice to see you know basic networking. Anyway, you asked for an option, I told you two. This doesn't mean it's an exhaustive list.
Which IRC client for each of the five major operating systems (X11/Linux, Android, Windows, macOS, and iOS) has a decent pastebin client?
An IRC client having a pastebin client? Why do I get the impression I'm talking to a Windows user here...
In the same way that GNU, Apache or NGINX, MySQL or PostgreSQL, and PHP or Python aren't part of Linux proper, which is a kernel. Distributions combine them. So which distribution of IRC server, bouncer, and pastebin server is any good?
Apples and Oranges, IRC is not software, it's specification. Also I fundamentally disagree with your notion that everything has to be one big integrated ball of stuff. Ah, *this* is why I got the impression mentioned above.
How big is that in RAM megabytes and storage gigabytes?
What is the point of asking this question? Couple megabytes of RAM and a couple megabytes for the software if you want to push it.
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep it in mind while reading the rest of your so-labeled comment.
you're hung up on Bash
WTF does Bash have to do with any of this, are you completely out of your mind? None of what I said concerns any shell.
Bash doesn't even include a conditional test.
Yes, it does, although I don't use it since it's stupid and unportable to write bash-specific scripts.
That's right, [ is an external program, with a required last argument of ].
No shit, Sherlock?. [ has nothing to do with Bash and everything to do with POSIX. The conditional syntax that you claim is absent in Bash would be [[
That's the tip of the iceberg for the fundamental flaws of sysvinit
It's got nothing to do with sysvinit you surprisingly clueless idiot.
and if you were hoping that OpenRC would save you
Why would I hope that a clone of the RC.d system would save me?
keep in mind that it has most of the same features [of systemd]
Hahahahahah.
especially the heavy dependence on C libraries.
Oh yes? Please enumerate those libraries.
In the real world, we don't need to hand-configure our network cards. We need some OS services which are guaranteed to be there. This is not the era of hand-carved config files, this is the era of docker containers.
Actually this seems to be the era of sysadmins that have no clue what they're doing, so a Windowsified Linux sounds like a good idea to those. "I don't want to have to know what I'm doing". You should maybe consider a change of work. Sanitation engineer sounds about right, doesn't it?
If you want a fully-custom, fully-scriptable OS, go play with Plan 9
While plan 9 is interesting, I'm happy with NetBSD
You're full of shit and living in the past.
"Newer is better" might be true for material products; in software it's often the exact opposite. Not that I'd expect dimwits like you to understand it.
You should run for office as a Republican.
We have no Republicans in Germany.
You should probably stop talking out of your ass. I guess you're repeating fragments of misinformation that you overheard other people that you deem knowledgable saying. Please both seek help and start learning a bit about this computer thingy field. I know it's a tough one.
Who is even talking about his claims about Windows, my challenged friend?
Let's try reading it again, shall we?
I'm glad you want to retry, best of luck that it works this time for you. To make things easier for your special little brain, let me quote you the relevant message again, just for you:
Those of us who have been using desktop Linux for many years, in my case, 100% since 2010, and as much as possible, since 1994, would dispute your assertion that Linux on the desktop is a joke.
What's your point exactly? The add-on will be abandoned
FTFY. Some time later, somebody will write a new addon, and the cycle repeats.
Are you looking for a conspiracy
No.
or something
I'm looking at an astonishingly long series of exceptionally bad design decisions.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to watch some videos on youtube. Oh wait, I can't because fuck the audio backend that has worked well for everybody for the last decade, let's add a hard dependency on pulseaudio; the hordes of people having issues with it are probably just using it wrong.
If you have worked at least 20 years as sysadmin then your judgement is obviously warped. The little issues you're dealing with every now and then that you barely even perceive anymore, and/or have automated? Unsurmountable barriers for Joe Sixpack.
I am not talking out of my ass, heck, I run NetBSD on my desktop. And it works very well for me, but I don't shit myself thinking that that isn't because I know what I'm doing.
There are exactly two widespread general-purpose OS that, while being crappy, are actually kinda-sorta usable by Joe Sixpack. Sure they will fuck up their machine, and occasionally require the neighbors kid who's "a real wiz with computers", but they can kind of make do. Linux? (or *BSD or whatever)? Different story. It's not intuitive. And, frankly, I think that's fine. You get the masses to use Linux by turning it into essentially Windows. Do not want.
It's not "because we don't like MS", it's because Joe Sixpack doesn't really have a reason to have a desktop anymore, so long as you give him an appliance that has a web browser (and those are rarely windows-based). And when you consider those appliances, the HUGE margin isn't all too huge anymore, MS isn't even ahead.
It doesn't even matter whether or not MS will EEE Linux, given that systemd is already turning it into a sort of Windows. I wonder how long until the developers add a registry.
If the browser drops it someone will write an add-on of some sort to allow you to manage them -- or you can just find the subdirectory they're in and delete them yourself.
And then a new Firefox version appears which happens to break all addons.
Your answer to the question of active/passive shoud/could have been this:
Uncredited copypasting might be your approach at trying to appear to have a clue; it's not mine.
But obviously you don't grasp the topic so you can not explain youself:)
Yet it was me who had to do basic research in order to educate you, who obviously has even less of a grasp on the topic.
as I'm not interested enough in researching it
Par for the course.
Sigh.. the world is so sad in our days...
Indeed, and your comment is the best example why that is.
The fact here is however on a different level.
No, it is not. This is only you trying to shift the goalposts in order to retrospectively don't appear as dimwitted.
We are talking abbout computer science and not 'electric engineering'.
Shift it, my special friend.
So a memristor which keeps its state after losing power is considered passeive, just like a magnetic disc. The opposite as in 'active' is a DRAM, which you have to refresh every few milliseconds. You can grasp that?
So DRAM is active because extra circuitry has to refresh it. Yeah, I grasp that, syntactically. It doesn't make a faint bit of sense and is pretty much arbitrary, so I'll file it under "bullshit I've read on the Internet".
So: I have no clue why you guys argue about active/passice school room knowledge. Where you obvioulsy don't have knowledge beyond any memorized simple categorizations.
Might I remind you that it was you who originally asked "Why would anyone declare single electric components as either active or passive anyway?". Now you're angry at me for trying to help you help yourself educate yourself a little bit?
Hint: a inductor is not passive.
It's almost as if you had *just* complained about classifying components as active/passive. You really aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?
It induces a magnetic field equivalent to the change of current. Obviously the quoted paragraph above from stack exchange, has a different definition was active/passive means. Facepalm. How should I know that? Lucky that I do not live in a country where I would be required to memorize such bollocks artificial categories:)
Good grief, are you done backpedaling yet? Don't reply until you're less angry at yourself, please.
True that. I mean, what's more secure than a system that can't boot/and/ resists troubleshooting?
"But fisted", you say, "Look into journalctl." [...] "Oh, you're running cyrus and the mail subsystem produces awful amounts of logs so journalctl will take minutes to even get you to the pager?" "I guess you could.. no, not that, but, maybe grep on journalctl -f?" "What do you mean, you need to see past events?" "Well don't run such a stupid mail server, it's not systemd's fault!!!" "What do you mean, it was not a problem pre systemd?" "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU"
Slashdot Mirror
Which IRC client integrates seamlessly with a bouncer
Pretty much any client
such that scrolling to the top of the scrollback automatically requests past messages from the bouncer and integrates them into the scrollback?
Any why would you want this oddly specific and useless mechanism? Why does the scrollback have to be requested on demand?
Sounds like you're also a friend of infinite scrolling on the web.
Good luck reliably DCCing from one NAT to another, especially for users behind an ISP that applies carrier grade NAT to all home subscribers. And good luck DCCing when the user who sent the file is offline.
Yes, nice to see you know basic networking. Anyway, you asked for an option, I told you two. This doesn't mean it's an exhaustive list.
Which IRC client for each of the five major operating systems (X11/Linux, Android, Windows, macOS, and iOS) has a decent pastebin client?
An IRC client having a pastebin client? Why do I get the impression I'm talking to a Windows user here...
In the same way that GNU, Apache or NGINX, MySQL or PostgreSQL, and PHP or Python aren't part of Linux proper, which is a kernel. Distributions combine them. So which distribution of IRC server, bouncer, and pastebin server is any good?
Apples and Oranges, IRC is not software, it's specification. Also I fundamentally disagree with your notion that everything has to be one big integrated ball of stuff. Ah, *this* is why I got the impression mentioned above.
How big is that in RAM megabytes and storage gigabytes?
What is the point of asking this question? Couple megabytes of RAM and a couple megabytes for the software if you want to push it.
What IRC server software handles persistence
Most bouncers like ZNC.
and attachments?
Client-side thing. DCC if you want. Pastebin otherwise. IMHO nothing that should be proper part of IRC.
And how big of a virtual machine is needed to run it?
It has to be at least this |-----------------| big.
This is a profoundly unintelligent comment.
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep it in mind while reading the rest of your so-labeled comment.
you're hung up on Bash
WTF does Bash have to do with any of this, are you completely out of your mind? None of what I said concerns any shell.
Bash doesn't even include a conditional test.
Yes, it does, although I don't use it since it's stupid and unportable to write bash-specific scripts.
That's right, [ is an external program, with a required last argument of ].
No shit, Sherlock?. [ has nothing to do with Bash and everything to do with POSIX. The conditional syntax that you claim is absent in Bash would be [[
That's the tip of the iceberg for the fundamental flaws of sysvinit
It's got nothing to do with sysvinit you surprisingly clueless idiot.
and if you were hoping that OpenRC would save you
Why would I hope that a clone of the RC.d system would save me?
keep in mind that it has most of the same features [of systemd]
Hahahahahah.
especially the heavy dependence on C libraries.
Oh yes? Please enumerate those libraries.
In the real world, we don't need to hand-configure our network cards. We need some OS services which are guaranteed to be there. This is not the era of hand-carved config files, this is the era of docker containers.
Actually this seems to be the era of sysadmins that have no clue what they're doing, so a Windowsified Linux sounds like a good idea to those. "I don't want to have to know what I'm doing". You should maybe consider a change of work. Sanitation engineer sounds about right, doesn't it?
If you want a fully-custom, fully-scriptable OS, go play with Plan 9
While plan 9 is interesting, I'm happy with NetBSD
You're full of shit and living in the past.
"Newer is better" might be true for material products; in software it's often the exact opposite. Not that I'd expect dimwits like you to understand it.
You should run for office as a Republican.
We have no Republicans in Germany.
You should probably stop talking out of your ass. I guess you're repeating fragments of misinformation that you overheard other people that you deem knowledgable saying. Please both seek help and start learning a bit about this computer thingy field. I know it's a tough one.
Who is even talking about his claims about Windows, my challenged friend?
Let's try reading it again, shall we?
I'm glad you want to retry, best of luck that it works this time for you. To make things easier for your special little brain, let me quote you the relevant message again, just for you:
Those of us who have been using desktop Linux for many years, in my case, 100% since 2010, and as much as possible, since 1994, would dispute your assertion that Linux on the desktop is a joke.
No need, I'm happy with NetBSD.
Bitch, please.
What do dependencies have to do with this? I'm inclined to disagree but not because space saving reasons...
He also said he's "using desktop Linux [...] as much as possible, since 1994", dimwit.
Oops, last line should've read "this is covered by Hanlon’s Razor though, so I don't think it's a conspiracy"
What's your point exactly? The add-on will be abandoned
FTFY. Some time later, somebody will write a new addon, and the cycle repeats.
Are you looking for a conspiracy
No.
or something
I'm looking at an astonishingly long series of exceptionally bad design decisions.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to watch some videos on youtube. Oh wait, I can't because fuck the audio backend that has worked well for everybody for the last decade, let's add a hard dependency on pulseaudio; the hordes of people having issues with it are probably just using it wrong.
this is covered by
If you have worked at least 20 years as sysadmin then your judgement is obviously warped. The little issues you're dealing with every now and then that you barely even perceive anymore, and/or have automated? Unsurmountable barriers for Joe Sixpack.
I am not talking out of my ass, heck, I run NetBSD on my desktop. And it works very well for me, but I don't shit myself thinking that that isn't because I know what I'm doing.
There are exactly two widespread general-purpose OS that, while being crappy, are actually kinda-sorta usable by Joe Sixpack. Sure they will fuck up their machine, and occasionally require the neighbors kid who's "a real wiz with computers", but they can kind of make do. Linux? (or *BSD or whatever)? Different story. It's not intuitive. And, frankly, I think that's fine. You get the masses to use Linux by turning it into essentially Windows. Do not want.
It's not "because we don't like MS", it's because Joe Sixpack doesn't really have a reason to have a desktop anymore, so long as you give him an appliance that has a web browser (and those are rarely windows-based). And when you consider those appliances, the HUGE margin isn't all too huge anymore, MS isn't even ahead.
feel nothing but pity
Lucky you! I additionally feel the occasional searing pain in the ass when my job forces me to fiddle with a windows box.
It doesn't even matter whether or not MS will EEE Linux, given that systemd is already turning it into a sort of Windows. I wonder how long until the developers add a registry.
If the browser drops it someone will write an add-on of some sort to allow you to manage them -- or you can just find the subdirectory they're in and delete them yourself.
And then a new Firefox version appears which happens to break all addons.
You know you're on a mainstream news site when nobody objects to the term "Internet cookie". Jesus. What's next, Internet pages?
They're mechanically robust and have a massive contact area.
Your answer to the question of active/passive shoud/could have been this:
Uncredited copypasting might be your approach at trying to appear to have a clue; it's not mine.
But obviously you don't grasp the topic so you can not explain youself :)
Yet it was me who had to do basic research in order to educate you, who obviously has even less of a grasp on the topic.
as I'm not interested enough in researching it
Par for the course.
Sigh .. the world is so sad in our days ...
Indeed, and your comment is the best example why that is.
The fact here is however on a different level.
No, it is not. This is only you trying to shift the goalposts in order to retrospectively don't appear as dimwitted.
We are talking abbout computer science and not 'electric engineering'.
Shift it, my special friend.
So a memristor which keeps its state after losing power is considered passeive, just like a magnetic disc. The opposite as in 'active' is a DRAM, which you have to refresh every few milliseconds. You can grasp that?
So DRAM is active because extra circuitry has to refresh it. Yeah, I grasp that, syntactically. It doesn't make a faint bit of sense and is pretty much arbitrary, so I'll file it under "bullshit I've read on the Internet".
So: I have no clue why you guys argue about active/passice school room knowledge. Where you obvioulsy don't have knowledge beyond any memorized simple categorizations.
Might I remind you that it was you who originally asked "Why would anyone declare single electric components as either active or passive anyway?". Now you're angry at me for trying to help you help yourself educate yourself a little bit?
Hint: a inductor is not passive.
It's almost as if you had *just* complained about classifying components as active/passive. You really aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?
It induces a magnetic field equivalent to the change of current. Obviously the quoted paragraph above from stack exchange, has a different definition was active/passive means. Facepalm. How should I know that? Lucky that I do not live in a country where I would be required to memorize such bollocks artificial categories :)
Good grief, are you done backpedaling yet? Don't reply until you're less angry at yourself, please.
Yes, and?
And therefore you're mistaken.
I came not up with that stupid active/passive talk that emerged in this thread.
Possibly so, but you were the first I spotted who got it wrong in a really obvious way.
And why would an inductor be "passive"?
This sounds about right.
Why would anyone declare single electric components as either active or passive anyway?
Because they're all stupid, of course.
By that definition, inductors aren't passive...
True that. I mean, what's more secure than a system that can't boot /and/ resists troubleshooting?
"But fisted", you say, "Look into journalctl." [...] "Oh, you're running cyrus and the mail subsystem produces awful amounts of logs so journalctl will take minutes to even get you to the pager?" "I guess you could.. no, not that, but, maybe grep on journalctl -f?" "What do you mean, you need to see past events?" "Well don't run such a stupid mail server, it's not systemd's fault!!!" "What do you mean, it was not a problem pre systemd?" "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU"
Who (and why?) produces NAND flash chips that don't have a size in bits which is a power of two? That doesn't make sense.
WHAT? I COULDN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE NOISE OF MY CPU, CASE AND PSU FANS!
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
BUT I MEAN TO BE YELLING
it's that developers stopped doing bloated software
Ha ha ha ha ha. Oh wait, you're serious? Let me laugh even harder...
From http://www.motherfuckingwebsite.com:
<script>
(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){
(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),
m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)
})(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
ga('create', 'UA-45956659-1', 'motherfuckingwebsite.com');
ga('send', 'pageview');
</script>