Strange I guess I am not aware of any distros that come with network drives pre-configured. But either way that would be a configuration error on the distro’s side then. Waiting for a network share to be available is actually a feature to many.

Say for instance you had critical data on the network share then you might not want to boot if that is not available. And if you don’t then you might mark the share as nobootwait.

Without knowing what the configuration on this specific drive you are having trouble with I really could not say what is wrong.

If you are having those issues with booting maybe it is because you configured your network share incorrectly? If you are waiting on shutdown timeouts for something then just go edit the timeout. systemctl edit <stuck thing>.

Typically when I crawl through journald it is to diagnose a problem with a specific application. Actually, the fact that those logs are easily accessible in a centralized place with easy to understand commands to access them is a reason why systemd (or more specifically systemd-journald) is so great.

The only times that I have had major issues like that was either because (A) I misconfigured something or (B) a package came misconfigured.

Quick someone share the dns haiku.

Do you have a source on the udev thing? I have not heard of this.

Were you looking at man systemd.timer? Pretty much everything you need is on there and it is not too complicated.

That law just says “A person that violates this title[…]”. Which is vague. But it appears to me that this would include the parent.

It is also something that only athe AG can bring charges for. This won’t be something that police are getting out their ticket books for. And if we don’t like how the AG is handling it, we can try to recall them.

there’s not a system in place to assign them responsibility regarding the child accessing places it should not (if we do really think they should not).

That’s what this law does. It provides a system (age attestation) and penalties for violating it.

No. I am more referring to how we left parents to let their children have free reign of the internet and they got injured. It is exactly because we cannot trust parents to moderate what their children do online that these laws are coming up. Do you think we would still get these laws if there were no children on the internet (maybe still for pron but that is because people are prudes).

I see that you edited your comment to take this part out but I do want to talk about it anyways.

You compared this to having automatic roads that shift risky drivers to their own space and how that would be ridiculous. Which it would be. But comparing a law like this to driving is an awful comparison.

Until recently there were very few laws regulating what a child is allowed to access online. But that is just not the same as driving. States require that you get a license, take a test, follow road rules, get your vehicle inspected, and many more requirements. We have these requirements because we know that we should not let an untrained driver on the road.

So fucking true. Once you get more than a hundred systems or so it feels like something new to resolve every day. Especially when your work let’s people with no idea what they are doing have root on “their” servers.

I have dealt with issues ranging from someone uninstalling subscription manager (RHEL) and then clearing the package cache to people replacing chronyd with ntpd for… Reasons? I guess?

I have thought about using bazzite but I prefer debian based as well as using more general purposed distros. So I am just on basic debian.

Usually when I need to do something like this I use python and BeautifulSoup4. You basically get the content of the web page and use bs4 to parse it and pull out the correct link. You will need to look at the source of the page to understand their page format.

If python requests isn’t able to get the right data then you might need to use selenium to use a full web browser to render the page and run any Javascript that might populate the page. Then you send that page content to bs4.

Edit: I know someone posted a link to archive but I figured some instructions would also be useful.

I’m not sure that I would recommend a newer user use sysrq. It is a very powerful tool that you definitely should not be blindly following from a random internet post without knowing what each command does.

In a truly frozen system then it can be good, but only as a final last resort. If the system can be unfrozen by other methods then that should be preferred instead.

There are a couple of things you can do. If it is frozen then try pressing ctrl+alt+1/2/3/4 to swith to a different terminal this will let you either restart your DE or reboot the system safely.

As far as debugging it I would typically start with looking at journal logs journalctl -b-1 should show you logs from the last boot.

Anything to replace firewall-cmd? (I know about ufw but it just feels too simple for my use case).

firewall-cmd commands are all fucked up and it feels like they use different verbs for very similar actions. Plus - - help is a few miles long which is not helpful. I just wish that it would have subcommands. Something like firewall-cmd zone public info

Hi. Are you a maintainer of one of the distros that might be affected by this law? If you aren’t then you have no standing to blindly tell them that they should not follow the law and risk fines that would ruin the funding for their project(s).

Bringing up porn sites is a false equivalency. Many of these laws do not require verification of ID or face scans as some are incorrectly claiming. They require a birthdate be entered during installation. The laws surrounding porn sites required 3rd party age verification which many of these sites said would not only crater their traffic from these states but also introduce a privacy nightmare which would also work against their business interests.

Right. I thin you are ignoring some complexity here. This developer added a field to store some optional data in systemd. That code needs to be tested, reviewed, debated, and eventually needs to be merged in. Those merges, at least with large projects, don’t typically get added directly to main they get added to a release branch. That release branch then needs to be completed and merged where it will then be packaged. Then different distributions/installers need to add that field as a requirement to their code which typically goes through the same process. Then all those changes need to be packaged for release by the distros themselves.

So I’ll ask again. Assuming that distros do not want to risk being fined and financially ruined. What is a appropriate time before January 1st 2027 to open this pull request in systemd?

This would also assume that we would like to propose a solution (for the data storage) early enough that distros do not all come up with their own implementations and leave PII strewn across the system.

I don’t get the “complying in advance” argument here. What would be an appropriate date for something like this to be accepted?

And people down voted me when I called out the Sam Bent blog post for what it is. A hit piece.

Even if systemd is managed by someone outside of Cali that does not automatically except them from all Cali laws. When a person decides to distribute software that comes with the legal responsibility of the locations where the software is distributed.

Why does your computer need to ask for your full name or office location? You don’t have any issues with those fields? Or is it because you understand that those are optional just like this field is?

If you don’t want to put your bday in then don’t. fork the software and remove what you don’t want. That is the great thing about open-source.

If you don’t trust the maintainer of systemd then why are you using their software in the first place?

You are right it is obvious that zuck wants to hoover up as much data as possible. But what if, instead of this being a data gathering ploy (since the law forbids the data to be used for anything else), this is them trying to put the responsibility of controlling what children look at online onto the parents?

While I don’t think that FB should be held resonsible for all the ways they fucked up the youth, I also think that the parents are to blame as well.

Are you implying that only people who are affected by something are allowed to contribute to open source projects? If this were some nobody developer in California would that really make you any more likely to accept that this merge request is okay?

Equating this law with hiding jews during the holocaust is crazy.