• 1 Post
  • 43 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2024

help-circle



  • Long time “old-school” kernel maintainers don’t know Rust and don’t want to learn Rust (completely fair and reasonable). But some of them don’t want to work with the Rust guys for lots’o’technical reasons.

    It’s by far not an easy situation technically. Like this is a huge challenge.

    But some of those old-school C guys are being vocal about their dislike of Rust in the kernel and gatekeeping the process. This came to a head at a recent conference (Linux Plumbers Conference?) and now one of the Rust maintainers has quit.

    The big technical challenge is being confounded by professional opinions.



  • If you install each OS with it’s own drive as the boot device, then you won’t see this issue.

    Unless you boot Windows via the grub boot menu. If you do that then Windows will see that drive as the boot device.

    If you select the OS by using the BIOS boot selection then you won’t see this issue.

    I was bitten by Windows doing exactly this almost 15 years ago. Since that day if I ever had a need for dual-boot (even if running different distros) each OS will get it’s own dedicated drive, and I select what I want to boot through the BBS (BIOS Boot Selection). It’s usually invoked with F10 or F11 (but could be a different key combo.


  • While I generally agree with that, that’s not what seems to be happening here. What seems to be happening is that anyone who boots Windows via grub is getting grub itself overwritten.

    When you install Linux, boot loaders like grub generally are smart and try to be helpful by scanning all available OSes and provide a boot menu entry for those. This is generally to help new users who install a dual-boot system and help them not think that “Linux erased Windows” when they see the new grub boot loader.

    When you boot Windows from grub, Windows treats the drive with grub (where it booted from) as the boot drive. But if you tell your BIOS to boot the Windows drive, then grub won’t be invoked and Windows will boot seeing it’s own drive as the boot drive.

    This is mostly an assumption as this hasn’t happened to me and details are still a bit scarce.












  • But it could also be for legal reasons, like websites where you can post stuff for everybody to see, in case you post something highly illegal and the authorities need to find you. Another example is where a webshop is required to keep a copy of your data for their bookkeeping.

    None of these require your account to “exist”. There could simply be an acknowledgement stating those reasons with “after X days the data will be deleted, and xyz will be archived for legal reasons”.

    Mostly it’s 30-90 days where they keep your data, just in case somebody else decided to delete your account or you were drunk or something

    This is the only valid reason. But even then this could be stated so that the user is fully aware. Then an email one week and another one day before deletion as a reminder, and a final confirmation after the fact. I’ve used services before that do this. It’s done well and appreciated.

    This pseudo-deletion shadow account stuff is annoying.


  • What the user was doing is that they don’t trust that the system truly deleted the account, and they worry it was just deactivated (while claiming it was “deleted”). So they tried to do a password recovery which often reactivates a falsely “deleted” account.

    I’ve done this before and had to message the company and have them confirm the account is entirely deleted.