mosiacmango

Rocky Rocky Linux

Rocky^2 linux for short

Somebody will write it.

That somebody will be Brandon Sanderson. The story will be good and impactful, but will suddenly lack any kind of romance or nudity.

This sounds like nothing, especially as its just "non fiction."

Sounds like the company made an app that can fill an arbitrary length of paper with various tidbits, some very likely hallucinated, about actual events.

So far, thats the most specific reason someone has given to use XDG, but I dont think it accurate.

FHS is the most used, as it's been the primary linux filesystem standard for decades. Isn't it better to stick with it if the only metric is popularity?

Yeah, I fully get that. The post and comments were very specific about how if you dont follow XDG, you're fucking up, while only generally saying that "everything would be better if everyone followed the same standard."

I pointed out that there are several standards and asked for a unique reason why XDG was the best to use.

I still haven't heard one, which is fine, but it undermines the "If youre not using, XDG youre a idiot" tone of the post and comments.

Jimmy wales owns "Fandom," The ad-ridden, co-opted wiki that has deep hooks into twitch and is itself trying to be a social media platform.

Way to be part of the problem, Jimmy.

Agreed. I use isthereanydeal.com to make a list of what I want and just get it from the cheapest vendor when it hits the target range im looking for.

With some many legit steam key resellers now, games are almost always on deep sales after the first 3 months or so.

Fucking flamethrower of an article, and likely spot on.

All specifications exist for a reason, and they all have a clear purpose.

What happens when you have 15 that are different and all overlap? When any of 15 is "right?"

/etc is a standard, defined in the filesystem hierarchy standard. This is not:

freedesktop.org produces specifications for interoperability, but we are not an official standards body. There is no requirement for projects to implement all of these specifications, nor certification.

Below are some of the specifications we have produced, many under the banner of 'XDG', which stands for the Cross-Desktop Group.

Its nit-picking, but this is a specification, i.e a preference, not an official standard. It would be great if everyone would agree on just one of these to use, but that isn't a foregone conclusion. Even the actual standard, the FHS, isn't followed by popular OS's like NixOS.

Someone asking a question doesnt merit the insult of saying they "would never ask if they used a terminal." I have no particular dog in this fight, but not being a dick isn't that hard.

As to using this standard, just because this is your preferred standard, doesnt mean its the only standard.

It may actually be the best now, but so were the 14 others that came before it. Your stated reasons are the same reasons as everyone agreeing to use any other standard. Consistency, predictability, automation,ease of backup/restore, etc.

What sets this standard apart from all the rest? Based on their own description, they aren't even an official standard, just one in "very active" use.

So why this, specifically? Just because its what you're already doing?

Huge leap forward if the process is in the same ballpark expense wise. Being able to reduce a cars battery by 50% would reduce the prices by at least 5k, and likely have longer range because of the reduced weight.

Edit : still very experimental. Battery only retains that energy density for 300 charges. This is an improvement from an earlier 50 cycles, but not really viable either.