« first day (3995 days earlier)      last day (35 days later) » 

7:16 AM
Well, that upgrade went much more smoothly than expected.
2 hours later…
9:17 AM
The last upgrade, in 2019, I guess, was quite troublesome.
This is a rather amusing comment...
Why do you use ancient filesystems? If you like more information, you should give more informaion on the used filesystems and operating systems, since the ability to make accurate backups depends on the filesystem and the OS. — schily 3 mins ago
Compared to typical comments such as
Well, I thought that this feature only works withstar (since 1997) and probably gtar. It definitepy is unsupported with the classicalm UNIX tar. — schily 16 hours ago
9:32 AM
reply with a comment saying how ZFS is non-portable, and thus useless.
@StephenKitt Is ZFS the ancient filesystem? Because the question is not tagged , nor is zfs mentioned in the question.
No, it's not. The opposite.
@ilkkachu OK. I'm confused. The comments mention ZFS.
Use ZFS/send and ZFS/receive... — schily 1 hour ago
@ilkkachu What's the opposite of ZFS? SFZ?
They're saying they're using "ext3/4, HFS+, APFS, FAT32", and our... German contributor is calling those ancient. Uncharacteristically, since usually he seems to denounce everything that isn't either POSIX, or from the 1970's.
@ilkkachu Oh yes, sorry, I see the second comment now. As usual, I suck at reading.
Though that should really have been mentioned in the question itself. People have the irritating habit of writing information in comments, and not updating the question.
9:58 AM
yes, it's irritating, though they probably just don't know better. But ZFS is rare enough, and the people who have it usually know what they're doing (or at least that they have it), so assuming they're using it is kinda silly.
@ilkkachu Yes, I don't understand why schilly started talking about ZFS.
I suppose ZFS is still saddled with that license that Debian does not like.
So presumably still not an installation option in the installer.
@FaheemMitha I think the code of conduct forbids me from commenting on that.
@ilkkachu LOL
I was a bit surprised to not run into more trouble on the upgrade. My system came back more or less immediately. The only thing is that the Konsole font size got enlarged for some reason.
And a few things got removed. And something may be going on with rsync (which I use for backups).
Anyway, nice to be more or less current again.
Relatively speaking. Because current by Debian standards means at least a year old.
Hmm. This is interesting if true.
Not everyone uses ZFS, Stephen :-) I for one have settled on ext4 because it's the most reliable and has a tons of tools to restore/fix it. ZFS on the other hand is near impossible to get data from in case it crashes. Lastly I prefer to use FS's which are in the kernel - gives me the satisfaction of knowing people actually test and use them. — Artem S. Tashkinov 14 mins ago
I was considering moving to ZFS myself.
Why would it crash?
10:21 AM
@FaheemMitha come on, six months
I know it’s the done thing to criticize Debian for having only old software, but on release it’s more up-to-date than you’re letting on.
10:40 AM
@StephenKitt Just kidding. Kind of. Actually, some things can lag a lot, for one reason or another.
11:08 AM
@FaheemMitha you get what you pay for ;-). (And even that’s a silly argument, the same things lag in RHEL too.)
11:32 AM
this conversation has been moved to chat ... :)
@ilkkachu pardon the off-site reply, so to speak, but you're absolutely right, re: unix.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5838/…; I just haven't found a good solution to it
(taking this reply to chat, since it's not really furthering the text-processing discussion)
11:48 AM
@JeffSchaller it seems to me that tags attempt to serve different purposes, some contradictory, and most not aligned with how the site says they should be used
@StephenKitt I think you're probably right; I keep scooping my spoon in the ocean to keep some of them useful, but I think the UI doesn't give good (enough) guidance
I got one wrong idea in my head 6 years ago, and I've been getting punched in the face by terdon every year since then
The whole tag wiki setup suggests that one usage is to provide information to people writing questions, but the horse has bolted, the barn has burned down, and the continents have shifted.
(he's much nicer about it than that, but I just haven't learned)
@StephenKitt or potentially have the wiki avoid the question in the first place, which would be really bad from a site-goal perspective!
The other big site feature around tags is being able to follow them, with a focus on potential answer writers; so tags on answers wouldn’t be useful here, but tags potentially end up driving answers (since people who follow specific tags are liable to use the corresponding tools, when the tags are tool-oriented).
@JeffSchaller yes, exactly!
Perhaps the most consistent tag feature is awarding badges...
gamification works
12:03 PM
@JeffSchaller yeah.
@StephenKitt the whole site attempts to serve different purposes, some contradictory ;)
@StephenKitt because the system doesn't actually show the tag wiki to the asker, unless they know enough to go looking for it, which they probably don't if they need it in the first place.
@ilkkachu yup, they’d have to hover over the tags after adding them, which is unlikely for those users who would benefit most from the information in the wikis.
(in the same way it doesn't show, let's say instructions on how to ask a question prominently enough, i.e. which specific details are absolutely required; or instructions on how to use code block formatting etc. etc.)
awarding badges is a nice feature though. With half the questions tagged , it's relatively easy to get a number of users with hammer-rights to half the questions ;)
@ilkkachu that, and ;-)
A bit less so, IMO, but yes, that too :)
Right, quite a bit less so, unix.stackexchange.com/help/badges?tab=tags&filter=gold shows that 21 gold badges have been awarded, and 8 for (and , , and ); 9 have been awarded for .
12:42 PM
@StephenKitt It wasn't a complaint. Just an observation.
Sometimes one can update the packages oneself, with the existing Debian packaging. But if it's complicated, that can be quite a lot of effort.
Or possibly difficult/impossible.
@FaheemMitha yup, that’s how I understood it!
Since the upgrade, as of this morning, I'm now seeing:
deflate on token returned 0 (8720 bytes left)
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at token.c(476) [sender=3.2.3]
I guess I'll have to investigate this, but just wondering if this means anything to anyone. It doesn't to me.
@StephenKitt Some tag wikis are useful. Though I don't know who wrote them.
@StephenKitt Well, the people who select them mostly don't know how they are supposed to be used. I suspect few people do. Presumably the mods do. And maybe some high rep users.
@FaheemMitha yes, definitely, but they are probably read by a very small number of people, and not by the people who would benefit most from them
@StephenKitt Most people probably don't know they exist.
@FaheemMitha exactly
12:51 PM
Maybe a floating message when someone tries to edit tags.
@FaheemMitha I would suggest even showing the tag wiki excerpt beneath the in-progress question as tags are selected, in the same way as the “similar to these questions” list
@StephenKitt Or that. Has someone already suggested that?
Would that be one for Meta U&L, or Meta SE?
@FaheemMitha probably this bug from 19 years ago: bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=50248 -- just kidding :)
(though in searching, it seems one person removed the 'z' option to work around it)
@FaheemMitha there’s this existing question on Meta SE which is similar
Q: People don't read the tag excerpts because we don't swat them into their faces

BraiamYou are a user asking a question, and the system is helpful, so it shows you this: (the 5 of them were suggested when I finished writing this post, I used only one, tag-wiki-excerpt) Seeing the problem yet? No? Well, lets explain: there's a common hearsay in meta about tagging and the mis...

I think some sort of fine-tuning could be used, maybe on a rep basis, or new user basis, that would actually interfere with the question-asking process to give good guidance (on their first question, or answer, etc)
getting in the way of asking questions might be a sacred cow, though
12:59 PM
@StephenKitt I haven't seen this one before, but upvoted FWIW.
1:36 PM
@JeffSchaller yeah, but the current situation for new users is pretty bad — ask a poor question, get comments about it, downvotes, perhaps a closure, and the system will then tell you that you can’t ask a new question, you need to fix the previous one. And instead of realising that this is how SE works, many new users think that it’s the commenters and closure voters’ cabal at work...
If the onus was on getting the first question right, instead of the second one, perhaps the overall situation would be better.
But no one has ever managed to convince random users to file bugs correctly, so I have little hope for questions here.
yeah, it's above my pay grade. smarter people than me are already on MSE with suggestions, so it's up to the designers at this point
2:12 PM
How are things on SO these days? Last I heard it was moving monotonically in the direction of increasing unfriendliness.
2:39 PM
I don't know, but it looks like the struggle continues:
Just disengage as soon as possible - we used to call those "help [blood-sucking creates of the night]" but, apparently, this is now considered "unkind" regardless of how true this assertion is. You aren't getting paid by the OP, so feel free to not follow up on any of their requests, especially if they move goal posts — Oleg Valter yesterday
Q: Why do we reward users for answering bad questions and would it be a good idea to incentivize those who downvote or flag them instead?

BdeeringI've noticed that a simple way to earn reputation is by answering easy questions. Even if I don't know the answer to a question it will often be very similar to another question or only take a few minutes of research. For duplicate questions I have the option of flagging the post, but with the cu...

3:01 PM
well that's the thing, isn't it. Is the site about helping people get answers to their (possibly very badly presented and underspecified problems), or about collecting information useful for future readers (which badly specified problems probably aren't)
3:25 PM
it's almost like there's some different purposes, some contradictory ;)
3:47 PM
@ilkkachu Both of them. At least, in theory.
But I agree that to some extent those aims are in conflict with each other.
If question posters would consider whether their questions could help others, then it might not be such an issue. But I doubt anyone does.
Not when you get "questions" like:
A: How to add external custom url to woocommerce endpoint

AnnaI need help creating an endpoint that links to some plug in where customer and seller can exchange information. please help me

@JeffSchaller posted as an answer!
4:26 PM
I needed the keyboard with the fancy quotes around "question" above ;)
3 hours later…
7:41 PM
After upgrading, some of my backups started crashing. It turns out udisk2 had changed my mount point from /media/faheem/My Passport to /media/faheem/My Passport1. I could not find a mention of this anywhere. And I wonder why such a change was necessary. In case there are multiple Passports?
The odd thing is there is a pre-existing /media/faheem/My Passport1 mount point, which appears to be from 2016.
It would be nice if the Debian maintainer would offer a heads-up about stuff like this, at any rate.
Looks like this might actually be some sort of bug. But why haven't I encountered it for the past few years?
If I understand this correctly, the numbering may keep increasing. That should be fun.
2 hours later…
10:04 PM
@StephenKitt you mean like
@JeffSchaller you mean like meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/381671/…? (probably SO-only)
No, I think this is the same wizard I see on unix.SE due to low rep:
10:24 PM
Or not
@AndrasDeak I missed seeing that particular one, but yes. Maybe that explains why all the the poor questions are in the Answer boxes!

« first day (3995 days earlier)      last day (35 days later) »