LeFantome

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

OpenSUSE is not an enterprise operating system. This is probably why they want the rebrand.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago

Makes sense really.

OpenSUSE is not the open version of SUSE ( SUSE Linux Enterprise - SLE ). If you compare to Red Hat, OpenSUSE is Fedora, not CentOS.

I can see how people would get the wrong idea.

It is a bit crappy that they waited so long though. On the desktop, OpenSUSE is quite an established brand.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

OMG. This is so hilariously true.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

Almost everybody that chooses SUSE ( SLE ) does so because of SAP.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Hilarious. I am sure that, out of principle, you have stopped using all the software that Red Hat contributes to your distribution.

If it is ok with you, I am not going to define my morality in terms of corporate interest. They are not my friends but I do not believe that shutting on their contributions does much for me either.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

It has “become clear”. Has it?

Red Hat contributes more to Open Source than pretty much anybody. Certainly more than SUSE. That seems self-evident. If you want to debate, bring receipts.

As per the article, SUSE gets most of its money from SAP. SAP was founded by a bunch of ex-IBM people in Germany. They make IBM seem like cowboys.

The new SUSE CEO is ex Red Hat. Again, according the the article, the hope was that he would bring some of the Red Hat “open source magic” but SUSE has proven too “corporate”. Not exactly supporting their own argument there.

I am not close enough to the situation to know, but I doubt SUSE is taking over anything from Red Hat soon. RHEL is so far ahead that they have multiple distros trying to be “alternate” suppliers of RHEL by offering compatible distros. SUSE themselves are doing that now. If the world is looking to SUSE, why isn’t anybody trying to clone SUSE Enterprise?

SUSE is making some smart moves, given that they are the underdog. But let’s not confuse that with SUSE pulling ahead of Red Hat.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

On a laptop that old, I highly recommend a 32 bit distro.

Q4OS with Trinity: https://q4os.org/

Antix https://antixlinux.com/

DSL https://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

You could also enable ZRAM If it is not already.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No. If you want to be cynical, ask if they are still burning natural gas.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They were saying we should have taken advantage of the short-term opportunity.

The problem is that Natural Gas is not portable and the plants required to ship it overseas take time and investment to build.

So, the situation was not so “pants on head” obvious really. That said, I agree with them that we should have done it. I say that as somebody that would like the fossil fuel industry to go away.

Canada would probably be a major LNG provider to Europe at this point if we had done it. However, they are trying to transition away from it as well so the clock is ticking. And, of course, if the war ends, some will go back to buying from Russia. So it was only ever a short-term opportunity for Canada ( though longer than many believed at the time ).

Natural Gas is still a fossil fuel so your main argument is correct. However, it is a lot better than oil or coal. It makes sense to move to natural gas over coal to generate electricity and the world is doing that. It also would have made sense to move vehicles, especially larger trucks, to Natural Gas. Even if the end-goal is electric, NG would have been a great first step ( especially in paces where the electricity is coal or natural gas anyway ).

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Government waste is always something to be concerned. But is this really the best we can dig up to be outraged about?

Half the countries in the world have consulates in New York. For one thing, it is where the freaking United Nations is.

I am too lazy to look for a real list but this will do for a start:

https://www.sacredheart.edu/offices--departments-directory/international--immigration-services/current-students/foreign-embassies-and-us-consulates/

So, it is not exactly an unexplainable mystery why we would want a consulate there.

$9 million for a country like Canada to have the same diplomatic heft as Nepal and St. Lucia is not exactly breaking the bank. That is not excessively extravagant or expensive real estate in Manhattan and it will certainly appreciate in value substantially over time.

Canada is going to spend $535 billion dollars this year! Let’s talk about how to reduce the $40 billion deficit. I don’t think ditching this condo is going to do it.

And the guy who has that job is not exactly unqualified. I certainly do not have his resume. I doubt he is in it for the free housing.

https://www.international.gc.ca/country-pays/us-eu/new_york-rep.aspx?lang=eng

And are we not reading the article or just ignoring it?

The article says that the purchase will save taxpayers $2 million as it is cheaper to relocate “to a new, smaller, more suitable, and more economical apartment” than it would be to renovate the existing residence.

“smaller” and “more economical apartment” do not sound like the kind of fat cat spending that the other comments here are promising.

I get that some of us cannot afford houses. Being mindlessly outraged about every article that mentions real estate is not going to solve that problem.

There is for sure real waste and corruption going on. Some of it actually matters. When I get mad about it, I would like to be taken seriously. So, I am not going to pile on to this nothing burger.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

I saw a few good commits in there. Sadly, I think we will have to wait for the next one before things really become usable.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (2 children)
view more: next ›