Well, great job on this one, anyway. I really like it!

I spent some time looking at all of these again and think I’m going to try XtremeFS next. It doesn’t check all of the boxes, but it seems simple enough. The alternative is a LAN-only IPFS; one of the things I’m trying for is a controllable local cache, like, a size-limited LRU.

That looks so fantastic! I love the zip top - so many bags have flaps, which look nice but are inconvenient. The external pocket - also common - always goes unused on my bags, and it’s just more bulk. I like this idea of a smaller pocket, juuust the right size for an e-reader.

Did you do anything on the inside for organization? Again, all the little pen slots and pouches are usually just bulk, but then, a couple of pockets like you did on the outside to put odds and ends would be handy. I’ve never really seen the purpose of dividers.

Anyway, I love the wabi-sabi of this! I’m a sucker for a leather messenger bag, especially one that has some form to it.

Get. Off. Of. X.

Would there be any benefit of running a dual boot set up with Windows thru 1 gpu and Linus thru the other

I don’t know if that’s possible. Linux sessions aren’t different operating systems running at the same time, they’re just different user accounts logged into the same OS, and in the multi-GPU scenario each gets assigned some input devices, a GPU, and a monitor.

Linux has always been concurrent multi-user, inherited back from the days of Unix mainframes and dumb terminals. X can be configured to run different login sessions on each GPU, and you’d assign input devices to each session when you configured it.

I recently had the same experience. Go looking for software; find an article that describes a project in detail that does exactly what you asked for; project doesn’t exist; further investigation finds no reference to the software anywhere other than that article.

This has happened a couple of times to me; the tip-off is that there’s no link to the project in the article, although sometimes there’ll be a link to a domain owned by a squatter or something unrelated. Unless the article has a date and it’s from a decade ago, I chalk those up to AI as well. I’m certain there are thousands of abandoned projects and domains, deleted repos, and so forth, but I think increasingly the odds of AI shenanigans are pretty high in these cases.

No, I haven’t done this for multi-user. However, having two graphics cards makes this much easier under Linux, because you can run a different session on each card assigned to each monitor. It’s almost trivial to do it this way. But, it does require two graphics cards.

One more common setup is when the CPU is an integrated CPU/GPU, but an additional graphics card has been added to the machine. This can do multi-session multi-monitor, with multiple input devices.

And especially if they’re a deep-sea isopod.

Look at how cute!

You can do this in Linux, with X11 (not Wayland). Here are some links:

• MPX
• Multi-cursor window manager
• Multiple cursors in DWM

It’s possible, but requires some effort. It’d probably be easier and more reliable in your use case; most of the issues I find are because people are trying to set out up so that two people can share the computer with multiple mice and keyboards, whereas you just want to use two different devices at the same time in different windows. For you it might be as simple as using SDL and setting SDL_JOYSTICK_ALLOW_BACKGROUND_EVENTS=1; see multi-pointer X for more info on that.

The hair is cool, but the fingernails really sell it.

Wait… vfat supports Unicode? The filesystem that craps out if the file path length is longer than a couple hundred characters; that is an extension of a filesystem that couldn’t handle file names longer than 8.3 characters; that doesn’t have any concept of file permissions, much less ACLs; the one that partitioned filenames in 13 character hunks in directories to support filenames longer than 12 characters… that isn’t case sensitive, except in all the wrong ways - this filesystem can handle Unicode?

I greatly doubt that. FAT doesn’t even support 8-bit ASCII, does it? 7-bit only. Unless you mean FAT32, which can optionally have UTF-16 support enabled. And it’s far easier to manage case changes in UTF-16 than UTF-8, using case mapping as MS does. The API handles all of this for you; it keeps track of what the the user calls them, but uses it’s own internal name for the file. And na’er the two shall meet, lest there be trouble.

I do think it’s sloppy and lazy; it’s very easy to avoid doing actual work thinking about the problem and to bang out some hack solution. In the end, far more work is done, but for the wrong reasons.

I don’t know what Apple’s excuse is, except maybe DNA. Apple ][ were not only case insensitive, they didn’t even have lower case characters at all. There was only one case, and maybe those engineers brought that mind set forward with the Lisa, and then the Mac. How it got into Darwin… is Darwin really case insensitive? I’m pretty sure on the company line - at the filesystem level, it is.

Hmmm. I doubt that, unless they were really bad programmers, downcasing (or upcasing) the file name in the file name accessors took much work, but I’ll grant it’s more than zero.

I’ll retract the “lazy” comment.

Yeah, “ouch.” That’s a lot of black ink. It doesn’t look laser, either, because there’s so much ink the paper warped.

Ouch.

Oh, good. Agent 32 was successful.

Utterly reasonable opinion. Case insensitive filesystems are just lazy programming.

Ah. Well, at least now I know the problem domain, even if it isn’t relevant to me.

Thanks!

My dislike for MacOS started with this. I had a WordPerfect document, and WordPerfect, but it wouldn’t let me open it because it insisted that it wasn’t a WordPerfect document. And despite the fact that I could open it in WordPerfect on other computers.

It’s always been this “I know better than you, idiot” mentality that drove me away. I went back, briefly, when businesses started letting employees request MacBooks instead of Windows - given those two options, OSX is preferable. Plus, it was Darwin by then, and the important UI - the shell - was essentially POSIX.

I well always resent MacOS having the temerity to think it knew better than me, especially in cases when it was wrong but you just could not force it to do something.

How will this affect me?

And most people don’t complain about computers being slow anymore. And when they do, it’s usually because of memory, disc, or network speeds. It’s almost never because of CPU cycles. The people complaining about performance that’s related to cycles are usually complaining about GPU processing.

It’s almost never a CPU power issue, anymore. Unless you’re a developer or scientist, and you’re actually trying to compute something. I have two beefy computers in my house - my desktop, for coding, and my media server, because Jellyfin insists on transcoding everything. The rest are all ARM, and mostly old ARM, and they’re all perfectly capable of doing their jobs. RISCV would be, too.

Honestly, this is a topic I’ve spent hours on.

bcachefs has this mode I’m pretty excited about - when it’s to a state I fell like I can trust it enough to use it - where it has replication levels. Like, you can RAID1 an SSD and (say) an sshfs mount, and configure bcachefs to use the SSD and only opportunistically replicate to the sshfs mount. It means the sshfs is only eventually consistent, but it’s still a fantastic feature I have always wanted. Note that I don’t know that you can literally use a remote network mounted share; it might be limited to devices. The examples I’ve seen usually talk about things like mixing M.2 and hard drives, or M.2 and SCSI, or IDE and a USB drive - devices with different speeds, but all physical media. Still, I intend to stress test that aspect because it’s something I’ve wanted for years.

I’ve tried so many… so… many network filesystems. They all suck in some way. Many, because they insist on owning the storage partition, or file, such that data isn’t accessible without spinning up the service. Most because they require a horrible amount of setup, server software, and general PITA-edness. There’s a network FS(?) called Upspin that talks about a design that sounds perfect, but actually running it is a terrible experience, and the instructions feel like it was designed to sell Google network storage services.

I don’t know of a good solution; I’ve just had worse experiences with NFS. Even Samba/CIFS was more fault tolerant; it just lacked basic fill filesystem features, like file permissions.