We test our code locally, but we cannot test the workflow. By definition, testing the workflow has to be done on a CI-like system.

There is nektos/act for running github actions locally, it works for simple cases. There still are many differences between act and github actions.

It might be possible for a CI to define workflow steps using Containerfile/Dockerfile. Such workflows would be reproducible locally.

Time for the yearly barrage of “Setup CI”…“Fix CI” commits.

That is my experience with basically every CI service out there.

Never tried that, though a quick search got me this: https://superuser.com/questions/1471937/how-can-i-add-a-bcd-boot-entry-for-linux-in-windows-boot-manager-in-efi

Windows will not boot with this method. By renaming the file back to bootmgfw.efi windows will boot again but now linux won’t boot. There is no clean solution, other than switch to different computer that doesn’t have this issue. Because of issues like this I don’t recommend dual booting. Installing only Windows or only Linux is more manageable for not-tech-savvy people.

In windows EFI partition, there will be an EFI/Microsoft/bootmgfw.efi file, I usually rename it to bootmgfw.efi.bak and that allows grub to load.

I have observed that many laptops are hard-coded to boot windows whenever possible. Even with windows bootentry missing, firmware will skip Grub set to first priority and start windows. Only way to make them start Grub is to rename bootmgfw.efi to a different name.

Testcontainers uses ‘ryuk’ to clean up containers and it needs docker socket mounted within its container to work. So if you had any hardening config that prevents the docker socket access within a container e.g user namespace or SELinux then Testcontainers doesn’t work.

And I think it would be nice if Testcontainers ‘just worked’ with Podman without any additional steps.

Nothing else. Though docker socket issue was important enough.

It wants you to put dummy details as fast as you can.

It is a game, but it might also be a card grabber.

I did not make this, and you’re supposed to put dummy details there. Don’t put actual credit card information.

Thanks man, my brain was short-circuited on Testcontainers so I couldn’t write better. Also I am stealing the title.

I don’t get it, how would a database container run your unit tests? And unless you know some secret option to stop the database after, say, it is idle for a few seconds, it will continue running.

The purpose is to test database dependent code by spinning up a real database and run your code against that.

No… too hard.

npm ruin dev running shittier could be a nice prank… depending on how often it gets typed.

That advertisement would be interpreted as Node C’s advertisement.

The plan is to treat public keys as node’s identity and trust mechanism similar to OpenPGP (e.g. include any node key signed by a master key as a cluster member)

Right now, none of the encryption part is done and it is not a priority right now. I need to first implement transitive node detection, actually forward packets between nodes, some way to store and manage routes, and then trust and encryption mechanisms before I’d dare to test this stuff on a real network.

The UI is desktop only for now, I’ll make the mobile UI some day.

I didn’t know the answer either, but usually you can compose solution from solutions of smaller problems.

solution(0): There are no disks. Nothing to do. solution(n): Let’s see if I can use solution(n-1) here. I’ll use solution(n-1) to move all but last disk A->B, just need to rename the pins. Then move the largest disk A->C. Then use solution(n-1) to move disks B->C by renaming the pins. There we go, we have a stack based solution running in exponential time.

It’s one of the easiest problem in algorithm design, but running the solution by hand would give you a PTSD.

Replacing “Programmers:” with “Program:” is more accurate.