Is Hugo good for, say, a portfolio website? I know its good for blogging, but I’ve been thinking about a simple portfolio website hosted on Gitlab pages (I wish I could selfhost, but I can’t due to a lack of hardware and restrictions from my student accommodation and their network policy), and was wondering if Hugo would be a good choice for a portfolio website, maybe just having one page per project or something like that?
The mention of the EULA brought back bad memories.
That was not a joke. I’m the guy that reads the Terms of Service and especially the Privacy Policy. I’m not a lawyer, but the more of these you read, the easier it gets to weed out the good ones from the standard (read: terrible) ones, and the absolutely monstrous ones. The Windows EULA is among the worst ones I’ve read (though I admittedly did a skim read of that one). As I was writing this, I decided to actually read the EULA and found a grammatical error in it lol.
Highly recommend trying it, especially on a tiling window manager! (doesn’t seem to be available for COSMIC yet, and I don’t think it’s in other DEs either, but I know floating WMs like Openbox had sloppy focus iirc.
I had a similar, but not quite the same story. Explained the basic premise of a show from my childhood using a few key words and it pointed me to a completely different show. However, it used a name for one character that reminded me of the actual name for the character. Very weird but still very helpful!
So even though it didn’t answer my question, it pointed me in the right direction.
Using a tool that allows you to build using OBS once, and distribute for all distros is already a solution that makes it possible to target all of Linux.
Flatpak’s sandbox isn’t really doing much for security/privacy as addressed by this: flatkill.org/2020 (Main concerns relate to pretty much every app escaping the sandbox making the sandbox essentially useless, and concerns that application runtimes bundled with flatpak are far less likely to be updated and patched than dependencies on your host system, and runtimes often actively contain security holes that are unpatched for runtime versions still used by applications.
BUT BUT
I have to agree that if it gets companies to support more Linux software, then I’m sure we can deal with it. HOWEVER, there is another issue, the issue of confusion. After all, isn’t one of the main reasons for trying to get more software on Linux, to use that software to get more people to use Linux? For that we need a more user-friendly approach, we need to figure out how to get less permissive, well, permissions, to applications, as well as to apply system theming by default (I know theming is controversial with the whole “don’t theme my apps” debacle but I think it would be great to have
AND YES, this post was mostly an experiment to see what people think and how they’d react to differing opinions different from the status quo. I’m actually team Flatpak. I think what Ubuntu has recently done to improve Snap speeds is great (now if only all the apps on Snapcraft updated to implement it all), but almost no apps have taken advantage of it. AppImage shows some promise in its simplicity, but that sacrifices a lot of usability and makes a lot of the improvements seen in snap and especially in Flatpak near-impossible (for example theming and .desktop file support).
I’ll be honest, probably the only issues I have with flatpak are:
having to type the whole thing. What I mean is running “flatpak run one.ablaze.floorp” instead of just “floorp”, for example. How about we do away with the whole “org.ablaze.floorp” and make it possible to just use “floorp”, the same way you can do that during an installation! If it’s been implemented for “flatpak install”, why not “flatpak run”, and even better, why not make it into some sort of alias, where you can run, say, “floorp-flatpak” from Terminal or a Run launcher?
Flatseal. I mean, Flathub has THE control center for Flatpak apps and nobody has taken it upon themselves to make this more official (this should be like a standard package imo).
Also for Flatseal specifically, can we make it easier to theme (gtk and qt) apps, (like a dropdown or something?) instead of having to look up the envvar name because I can’t remember it?
Can we find a way to force apps that don’t really need full filesystem permissions to remove that? Maybe just have certain user folders, like Downloads and Pictures instead of the entire home directory as most apps simply don’t need this level of access? Maybe make the Flathub team decide on a case by case basis if the app really needs all that access and ask the dev to restrict that as a requirement for being added to Flathub? If you claim to offer security and privacy, might as well prove it.
The only times Arch broke for me were when I broke it. There were 2 exceptions, however.
I once went a long time (a few weeks) without updating and I had issues relating to keys and the pacman keyring. Luckily, Erik Dubois had a video about exactly that and the system was fixed within <30 minutes (including finding the video and watching it)
The other time my computer turned off during an update which involved updating the kernel so my system broke (I can’t remember if I turned it off or if it ran out of battery). I recovered it using live media, chrooting and doing an update again from inside the chroot, which fixed it. Once again, took about 30 mins.
Every other case of breakage was caused by me actively tinkering with the system.
I should note that this doesn’t include minor issues like some configuration no longer working because of an update or something like that, as 1. this isn’t a system-level breakage and 2. it isn’t Arch’s fault.
As crazy as that might sound, as a “professional” distrohopper, I also find Arch to be much easier to set up and far less problematic, especially now with Archinstall which practically takes away a ton of the configuration and complexity of initial setup away.