I'm interested in C or Go, but i'm open to ideas.

I have plenty of sh scripts i created to integrate my tools and system, so i have some experience and i don't want a scripting language like python.

My first plan is to learn the basics of the language and rewrite some of those scripts.

I think my first pick will be a script that uses ffmpeg to convert my flac files to mp3 or opus. I use sndconv -opus/-mp3 and it checks if there are flac files in the folder (i only have full albums), converts and puts in a folder named "$artist - $album".

My long term goal is to make a cli/tui music player like cmus.

UPDATE: i'm having plenty of success with Go right now. I just wrote a basic version of my music conversion script. It's just converting a music i pass as argument to mp3, but i'll keep working on it and adding functionality just to dip my toes in Go. It seems like a good language and i'm having fun!

Thanks for all the answers!

EDIT: SOLVED

It looks like it was much simple than I thought and someone solved it on Reddit already. I won't delete, just leave the link if someone is interested.

Runtime Environment

• OS: MX Linux 18
• Result of Y: 4.19.0-5-amd64
• dotfiles
• i3 version: 4.13
• ~/.config/i3
• GNU Emacs: 27.0.50
• ~/.emacs.d

Issue

Sometimes I use "whereis" (aliased for "wh", but it doesn't make any difference...) for my own scripts.

I usually copy their paths manually (using tmux) and paste to the command line resulting in something like this:

nvim /home/my_username/my_scripts_folder/my_script

Could I make that into a single command?

Thanks in advance!

I know there are similar products I could buy in the US that would give me this experience, but I'm not in the US and I don't have much money.

In the old days, my father had some kind of machine that was not a proper laptop and not a proper typewriter. It opened instantly to a text editor. As far as I remember, there was no noticeable boot time. It had a keyboard and an entry for a floppy disk. You typed your stuff, saved it to the floppy disk, probably to send via email or to print in another machine. I loved that machine.

I love these little gadgets that do one thing and one thing only. And, as someone with severe ADHD, they're often a necessity. If my Kindle had Youtube I would never read a book. If my PS4 had Emacs I would never play a game. The list goes on, but the principle is this: a lot of things are useful to me precisely because of what they cannot do.

And that is why I wanna recreate my father's crazy computer-typewriter.

Because I know how to use the command line, it really needs to be in total lockdown: I open it up, it shows a very simple text editor (with a few handy features that make it works even more like a typewriter) that I cannot configure, tinker or alter in any way. It's focused on writing (not editing) literature because that's what I need and other kinds of writing require an internet connection.

It would save and back up automatically (like a typewriter) to one or more drives at your choice.

There would need to be a few options because of different screen sizes, the number of screens etc, with an interface to make it easier.

So the idea is an ultra-minimal, kiosk-mode Linux distribution that can either go on a flash drive or be installed on an old laptop. No package management, no internet connection, no access to the command line, no configuration files, no distractions whatsoever. I wanna forget I'm even using Linux. I wanna recreate my father's typewriter/computer that he never let me touch.

How do I do this?

I currently use MX-Linux, which is a great distribution but does require me to reinstall it from time to time. It also comes with all the good/bad Debian legacy, and sometimes things can get really fucked up (okay, I admit it: MX IS NOT PERFECT. But nothing is, okay? Settle down.)

My new Linux Distribution doesn't need to have all the new bells and whistles, but it needs to be able to stay reasonably current with new packages and innovations. I don't mind some manual work, but I also don't wanna spend my days maintaining the system.

This distro is supposed to be a tool to work with, not a hobby to be pimped, riced or whatever. I will occasionally play and edit videos on it (don't worry, it's all AMD, thank you advice for the Tildes ;)

I use the i3wm window manager (not the gaps fork), so native support is a must and current versions are preferable (MX's version is from 2016. 2016!). If there's not a current version of Emacs, I'll compile my own. The same is true for Neovim, dmenu, rofi and the suckless terminal.

Configurations on text files do not scare me, but I don't wanna spend all my time scripting stuff. I don't mind compiling stuff either so Gentoo and other source-based distributions are valid options (as long as they allow me to work on stuff instead of working on the distribution...). That said, I have no preference whatsoever between binary and source-based.

Unstable distributions like Arch and even Manjaro are a no-no. I need my computer to work 99.99% of the time, like a fucking refrigerator. That said, I would like some newer packages and tools such as Gimp, Inkscape and a video editor like Kdenlive. Maybe flatpak is an option? I was never able to get it to work properly.

I'm also open to crazy things like Nix, but only if it'll make my life easier: I have no philosophies on the mater.

Any suggestions?

I've been using Linux for the past 5 to 10 years. I'm not a developer, but a mid-to-advanced user. I don't really know bash (or any programming language for that matter), but I got a folder with 100 bash scripts I wrote myself. I compile my own Emacs (which I configured from scratch and contains more than 200 crudes functions of my own), Neovim (also configured from scratch) and other programs such as suckless terminal. I'm an i3wm user and currently use MX-Linux. I'm very good at Googling and pattern recognition.

I got a brand new AMD desktop with a Ryzen processor (no dedicated graphics, wifi works fine with a USB adapter). Should I try Gentoo, or maybe I should study more (maybe with something like Linux Journey)in order to get a better experience?

Reasons to install Gentoo:

1. Learning experience
2. A completely customized desktop experience
3. Never having to reinstall my operating system again
4. Masochism
5. Putting my powerful processor to work
6. It seems cool (and less painful than LFS)
7. Some hypothetical performance gain

Introduction

I wanna say that I made several corrections, additions, and improvements just because I love you guys way more than I love the people at Reddit

• Please note that I'm merely a dedicated Linux user, I'm speaking from that point of view. I'm not a developer and not a programmer. These are just my opinions of 10+ years using Linux

• These are just some commentaries from a dude who happen to love the concept of STABILITY in general (autism represent) and would like to discuss how it works when it comes to Linux distributions. This is all based on my use-cases and on what I think is common sense. I have no knowledge of how open-source projects really work, and make no claims regarding how they should work.

• Only distributions that claim to be stable are under my scope. So Arch and Debian Unstable are clearly out the scope, but Slackware, CentOS, Debian Buster, and MX-Linux are clearly under the scope.

• All considerations are void if the malfunctioning is SOLELY a product of hardware, extremely rare conditions or your own lack of knowledge.

• Except when otherwise noted, non-compliance means the distribution is deemed not stable.

1 Deal Breakers

After a correct installation by the user on hardware that is expressly supported by the developers, a stable distribution should, in the period of 1 year (counted from the first boot):

1. Remains bootable, manageable and fully accessible.
2. Work with almost no maintenance or intervention (updates excluded)
3. Present no decrease in performance
4. Freeze at most once every two weeks
5. Have no package issue that cannot be solved by a simple command from its own package manager

2 Major Issues

Because of the complex nature of major issues, I'm not going to establish any criteria about them. Both stable and unstable distributions have critical problems that cannot have a fixed time-frame.

3 Minor Issues/Bugs/Annoyances/etc

Small issues are the ones that do not impede the usage of the machine, but provoke significant annoyances:

Examples:

1. Window switching is not working properly
2. The mouse stops working for 3 seconds every 15 minutes
3. For some reason, the letter "c" is sending "h" on the terminal
4. My configurations are not saved after reboot
5. My configurations are not being saved at all
6. I must change video output manually every time I switch monitors
7. I must change audio output manually every time I switch monitors
8. Some essential configuration is ridiculously hard to find
9. Configurations have no undo button
10. Configurations have no reset button
11. A certain package cannot be installed
12. A certain dependence cannot be installed (dependency hell)
13. There's a ridiculously accessible keyboard shortcut that makes your keyboard change layouts all the fucking time

3.1 Places for Research

Such minor issues must be solved within 30 days, as long as the user does their part and seek some of the following resources:

1. Google
2. Official websites
3. Official forums
4. Official warnings, newsletters, etc
5. Semi-official communities
6. FAQs
7. Manuals
8. Github Issues
9. Gitlab Issues
10. Other Venues to post issues

If the minor issue is not solved in 45+ days, the distribution will be deemed not stable, regardless of the behavior of the user.

4. Conclusion

It is my opinion that, if any of the major and minor requirements are not fulfilled according to their particular rules, the distribution in question should not be deemed not Stable.

I found my grandfathers old PC on the attic and want to revive it for him. He really loved that pc. Sadly that potato barely runs Windows xp so I thought about putting a Linux onto it. My Linux experience is limited to Mimt and Debian, both way to heavy for this old laptop. I need recommendations for a very light weight Linux Distro!

Specs:
256 mb DDR1 Ram
Intel Celeron M 320 @ 1.4GhZ
40gb Hard Drive

It's a small, simple gift and nothing where I want to put money into. Also it won't be my granddads daily driver so please don't recommend me a new one (a lot of people did that on other websites so I am rather careful). Thanks in Advance!

Some of you have read the Typesetting Markdown blog series (https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/). The plan was to finish the last two parts with Annotated Text (basically markup for Markdown) and Figure Drawing (MetaPost); however, people have asked for a post on Markdown to EPUB, others have asked for high-quality PDF theme templates using ConTeXt, and some have requested rendering Markdown into HTML.

Within the realm of Markdown, digital documentation, typesetting with ConTeXt, R, externalized interpolated strings, and bash scripting, what would interest you for the next post in the series?

(Please flip through the blog series to see the topics that have been covered.)

Can be something current or ancient, and if you've really got an axe to grind feel free to drag in Windows or macOS or other proprietary operating systems.

Personally after using i3 for around half a decade now (though I switched to sway about a year ago) everything else I try just seems to add friction.

To clarify I'm not incompetent at computers, I'm sure people don't tend to install Linux if they aren't familiar with technology in a decent capacity. But for instance I can't code, can't operate the command line short of copying and pasting command, and don't really know what I'm doing with the technical aspect other than following online guides. I have used windows all my life. I'm Linux illiterate for lack of a better description.

I decided I wanted some form of USB bootable computer, i'm familiar with chrome books, enjoy the light weight OS, and am bed bound to the google ecosystem so I when I saw how you could plug in a USB and have the computer boot into Chrome OS running off the USB I thought that sounded perfect. But during my research of discovery I found that Linux seemed like a very good alternative, I had always had it in my head that it was very technical and finicky system where to do a simple google search you had to code in half a dozen lines into the control terminal in some bizarre 2018 text adventure to use the web, I do exaggerate of course but the image I had conjured up over the years was of a very non-user friendly experience and a system made for those running technical aspects such as web servers and system management.

I decided you can't knock it to you try it and besides turns out you can't get chrome OS on a 32GB USB it has to be 8GB or 16GB apparently. So I installed Ubuntu on my USB, no clue if this is some snooty distro, or a version of Linux that's mocked in the community, or the perfect distro but after minimal research it seemed the most popular and well received version to put it on a USB and booted into it.

Instantly all my preconceived notions we're erased. It's clean, modern, simple, light weight, and easy to use with a very intuitive and familiar UI. It's pretty much a more open and degooglified (That's a nice word) version of Chrome OS. Since Firefox Quantum was released I emigrated over to try break some ties with google for privacy reasons like it's some pervy conjoined twin of mine, I know it's not good for me, I don't want it there but I can't get rid of it without harming me.

It's got a simple UI that's familiar to windows albeit without all the bloatware and ads spread everywhere, it doesn't track you like window does (that's as far as I'm aware it did ask to collect anonymised telemetry data which I opted out of). With windows I'm so used to having to go through 3 different pop up windows to change a setting that in Ubuntu it feels like I'm missing features although I'm yet to find one that's not there. The best bit about Linux, is if theirs a setting you want to change and can't find, than someone online has wrote a guide giving you a command line code to copy paste into the terminal to fix it.

Although to me it feels more on par with Chrome OS than Windows as a bare bones OS with simple apps and a web browser to use the internet with, in this regard Linux wins easy, way more open, no profit based motivation, and more accessible allowing itself to be used anywhere.

All though that comparison holds up for the normal user and if you are someone who just browses the web and uses apps like Spotify than Linux is amazing it's not complex or difficult, truly wonderful.

What makes Linux even better is the fact it's not a fair comparison, sure to me it's like Chrome OS due to the simple purposes I use it for but what's truly great is all that nerdy technical stuff I thought Linux was for you can do, if you are hosting a web server than linux gives you a free platform to do it, it feels like you are directly modding the PCB of the computer it's that open.

In retrospect to typing all that I feel I've just blurted out a generic description of Linux and for those that use it I'm sure they just think I was naive, but this is more aimed at the average user, Linux, or at least Ubuntu, is great, it's: simple, easy, fresh, clean, open, modern, intuitive, versatile, multi-purpose, and free. It's not some difficult to use system, it's alarmingly simple, but infinitely useful

It's easy to learn and difficult to master.

I'm curious as to what the Tildes Linux/BSD community (and I suppose other answers like Windows or MacOS would be acceptable, though they may feel a bit more dry) use for their desktop. I imagine that Ubuntu and Gnome will dominate the answers as you would expect, but maybe you'll surprise me. Personally, I'm on Arch Linux with i3-gaps. I use Arch because I enjoy the DIY aspect of Linux as well as the aur and slim nature of Arch. I'd also be lying if I didn't say I use it partially just because I like the "pacman" pun.

As for i3-gaps, I think that WMs are generally more customizable and good for 'ricing', plus they go with my workflow and are convenient in that they load faster and the likes, though I have to admit I have only ever used i3 (I've been considering trying out bspwm). So, what do you guys use? You can also of course share more information such as your shell or DM if you wanted, though I highly doubt anyone cares what display manager you us or anything.

There seems to be a trend lately of people switching over to BSD operating systems. Having read some blog posts on the matter and now given the recent system-d controversy, I'm genuinely curious to give FreeBSD or OpenBSD a go as my main OS.

For those who have switched over to BSD, what are some problems you've encountered and/or what are some things you miss?

I was using Antergos for like 15 days and I really loved it! Not Antergos but Arch, I like how simple everything is in arch. Before installing antergos I tried to install arch on vm but failed. so i installed antergos with i3wm. somewhere i wanted to install vanilla arch.

Initially I was referring to the wiki with elinks and doing it carefully but failed. my setup was going to be arch + grub + luks, for some reason grub didn't show up while booting. i also encountered other error which made grub-mkconfig to hang. later i decided to drop luks so arch + grub, but again same error.

i've used debian family distros for a long time and grub was the most used bootloader so i wanted to install that. next i looked for a guide online and followed another guide which had same commands as arch wiki. again that failed.

after some more searching i found archfi, so basically it is a script that will ask me questions and install everything. again that grub thing failed so i went with systemd for the second time with this script. & voila!

later i used archdi to setup lightdm-gtk-greeter and installed i3wm.

i didn't install it myself but i am happy with my arch and probably someday would do it myself.

btw, i use arch

^{For the uninitiated, you can visit puppylinux.org to get to know more about it.}

My first experience with Puppy wasn't good, since, for the life of me, I couldn't get the saves working. I still didn't, but I found that xenialpup does work for some reason, so I stuck with it.

After that, it's been great, and although I don't like the UI and some of the default apps, it worked on every computer I've tried it on, and it's light enough to run well on ancient computers.

As far as the tools go, it has everything I need to do my work, even if I'd prefer different tools (like vim and ranger).

That is, of course, only a problem with the default configuration, and Puppy has a very convenient tool to remaster itself, which I'll be using these holidays. It's great to be able to build a more welcoming version for yourself without needing any knowledge or spending a lot of time.

So, I just wanted to see what was your experience with Puppy, or, if you haven't tried it, what you think about it.

So I am reading the cgroups manpage because I want to learn about... cgroups. It tells me that for CGroups V1, if I want to use specific features, my kernel needs to be configured. Either I missed a section or it isn't there, because I don't see much mention of kernel requirements for CGroups V2.

So, my question is, is my kernel ready for CGroups, or should I recompile? Should I be able to support both V1 and V2? The manpage says V1 was a heap, so I was thinking I might continue without it... ... ...

CONFIG_CGROUPS=y

# CONFIG_BLK_CGROUP is not set

CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y

# CONFIG_CGROUP_PIDS is not set

# CONFIG_CGROUP_RDMA is not set

CONFIG_CGROUP_FREEZER=y

# CONFIG_CGROUP_HUGETLB is not set

# CONFIG_CGROUP_DEVICE is not set

CONFIG_CGROUP_CPUACCT=y

# CONFIG_CGROUP_PERF is not set

# CONFIG_CGROUP_DEBUG is not set

# CONFIG_NET_CLS_CGROUP is not set

# CONFIG_CGROUP_NET_PRIO is not set

# CONFIG_CGROUP_NET_CLASSID is not set

edit: wowie markdown fix