If it ain't broke, I'll fix it! Β· he/him
I'm porting Linux to Apple Silicon Macs at Asahi Linux.
Joined: 2022-11-06
ββββ
2024-12-15 marcan β 1π€ β RE: ?
@thakis Thanks!
2024-12-15 marcan β 1π€ β RE: ?
@chandlerc Thanks :)
2024-12-15 marcan β edited β 2π 4π¬
Hey Google, have you considered unrestricting issue 378017037 so that everyone on Asahi seeing everything Chromium crash due to another 16K page issue can actually find the bug instead of [β¦]
ββββ
2024-12-13 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@erincandescent @flameeyes The issue isn't fundamentally legal, it's social. Regardless of what the law says about reading contracts, in the FOSS world, we consider a license that does not [β¦]
2024-12-13 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@vjon @delta Correct. Doing what the AGPL claims to do / people believe does is fundamentally at odds with the Free Software Definition. You'd have to use a license that is, by that definition, [β¦]
2024-12-13 marcan β π marcan β 5π¬ β RE: mjg59
@mjg59 Fun anecdote: A friend of mine once tried to get a certain piece of open hardware RYF-certified. At the time Linux would run on the hardware, without free GPU acceleration. The shipping [β¦]
2024-12-13 marcan β 1π€ 2π¬ β RE: darkling
@darkling @mjg59 Read the article. Their "unreasonable" perspective isn't unreasonable in the sense that it tries to enforce that everything is free or push a maximalist freedom argument.
It's [β¦]
2024-12-13 mjg59 β π marcan β 1π 11π¬
When it comes to non-free firmware I think there's two reasonable positions - treat it like non-free code running on a remote system (suboptimal, outside the scope of current free software [β¦]
ββββ
2024-12-12 lina β π marcan β 1π 3π¬
I wrote a blog post! ^^
Beyond Gaming: X11 bridging in muvm
asahilinux.org/2024/12/muvm-x1β¦
ββββ
2024-12-08 marcan β 1π€ β RE: ?
@return0 Beautiful.
@val I thought there was a standard for this, something about the first comment being special and not minified?
2024-12-08 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@thesamesam @lanodan I'm talking about AGPL software that Gentoo applies patches for directly in upstream portage and does *not* do any license URL updates for, which I know for a fact used to [β¦]
2024-12-08 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@lanodan @thesamesam And this is why the AGPL is completely broken.
2024-12-08 marcan β 2π€ 1π¬ β RE: ?
@thesamesam @lanodan The difference is that with Debian/etc, the person committing the license violation is whoever applies the patch and builds the binary, which is not the end user. With [β¦]
2024-12-08 marcan β edited β 2π¬ β RE: marcan
Practical AGPL reminder: You are safe as long as you do not contribute to or modify AGPLed software, and as long as you don't use Gentoo or other source-based distros. As long as you follow [β¦]
2024-12-08 marcan β 1π 1π€ β RE: ?
@flameeyes Replied here: social.treehouse.systems/@marc⦠(ping because quotes don't notify)
2024-12-08 marcan β edited β 1π 4π¬
My reading is that there is no requirement for batch processing at all. As long as the software itself (as defined by the usual viral GPL linking rules) does not support something that can be [β¦]
ββββ
2024-12-03 arstechnica β π marcan β 2π
Join us tomorrow for Ars Live: How Asahi Linux ports open software to Appleβs hardware
Join us 3:30 pm ET Wednesday to unpack the effort to run Linux on Apple [β¦]
2024-12-03 marcan β edited β 2π 1π€ 3π¬
Tomorrow (Dec 4th) at 15:30 ET / 20:30 UTC I'm going to be on Ars Live with @alyssa talking about Asahi Linux!
Watch us live at youtube.com/@arstechnica
ββββ
2024-12-02 marcan β 1π 1#οΈ 1π€ 3π¬
Remember when I said Bootkitty felt like a homework project?
x.com/ESETresearch/status/1863β¦
[β¦]
ββββ
2024-11-30 marcan β edited β 4π
Sooo Ars, after correcting the original deeply flawed, pure clickbait article, has now doubled down with new info about how "Bootkitty" is actually used.
TL;DR: I was right about Bootkitty [β¦]
ββββ
2024-11-29 marcan β 1π 1π€ β RE: ?
@_radioactiveresponder Well... arstechnica.com/author/dan-gooβ¦
ββββ
2024-11-28 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@sertonix @dangoodin Some of them do, but not all, it's not standard.
2024-11-28 marcan β 1π€ β RE: ?
@PinoBatch The long-term supported way to run X11 sessions is using a rootful XWayland inside a minimal Wayland compositor. Use cases that continue to require X11 for whatever reason should be [β¦]
2024-11-28 marcan β edited β 1π€ β RE: marcan
@dangoodin Since this is getting some traction and I expect questions about the "Secure Boot" part of the whole story, here's a TL;DR:
Secure Boot means one of three things:
[β¦]
2024-11-28 marcan β edited β 2π€ β RE: ?
@kanongil @dangoodin Dan seems to be completely mistaken about what a "bootkit" is (it is a bootloader-launched rootkit, not a UEFI firmware implant), which is somewhat concerning given he's [β¦]
2024-11-28 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@gudenau @dangoodin You could kill it by reinstalling grub if the rootkit portion doesn't hijack that, or just by booting from a recovery disk and chrooting in and reinstalling grub if it does. [β¦]
2024-11-28 marcan β 2π€ β RE: ?
@kowalski7cc @dangoodin It works with the shim/MokManager stuff just like GRUB itself would (i.e. on first run the user gets prompted to trust it, if they have the standard third-party-friendly [β¦]
2024-11-28 marcan β edited β 2π 1π€ 1π¬
Ars headline: "Found in the wild: The worldβs first unkillable UEFI bootkit for Linux"
Article then proceeds to describe a toy GRUB wrapper bootkit that has nothing to do with UEFI firmware [β¦]
ββββ
2024-11-27 marcan β 1π€ β RE: ?
@jeisom It's a fix for the regression, which was that the patch was mistakenly dropped downstream.
ββββ
ββββ