• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 5th, 2024

help-circle
  • Persistent keep alive is configured per connection by all peers (server and client typically). As I understand it, Wireguard’s peer-based architecture will let both client and server peers define an optional persistent keep alive timer in order to send heartbeat packets on interval. Otherwise Wireguard on either peer may keep opening and closing connections for inactivity (or get its connections forcefully closed externally) if traffic isn’t being regularly sent. This can occur even though the network interfaces for Wireguard on both communicating peers remain up.

    I do agree that running some kind of health-check handshake service over the Wireguard tunnel is an easy enough way to periodically check the state of the connection between peers.


  • Depending on how your connection is negotiated, it may partially not be possible due to the architecture of Wireguard. There is likely some way to hook into capturing handshakes between clients (initial handshake, key rotations). To determine disconnects and reconnects however is a challenge. There are no explicit states in the connection. The closest thing to disconnect monitoring is utilizing a keep alive timeout on the connections. There are some caveats to using a keep alive timer, however. Additionally, not every connection may use a keep alive timeout, making this a full solution infeasible.

    Detailed information about Wireguard session handling can be found in section 6 of this PDF.








  • https://librewolf.net/

    A summary from its site and known technical details:

    • no telemetry by default
    • includes uBlock Origin
    • has sane privacy-respecting defaults
    • prepackages arkenfox user.js
    • relatively well-maintained fork of Firefox that keeps up with upstream
    • No major controversies AFAIK

    As for Windows 7, nobody should really need to install Librewolf anyway on such a device. No device running Windows 7 should have access to the internet at this point. If you are asking about compatibility intending this use case, you have bigger problems to worry about than your choice of browser. If you just need to view HTML files graphically, even Internet Explorer or an older firefox ESR will do.


  • We are well beyond the point of a majority of common hardware having built-in kernel drivers and userland software for extra stuff like RGB control that the best advice is rather avoiding Linux, to instead avoid the trash hardware (NVidia for the time being, GoXLR, Broadcom, etc.). My GPU, audio hardware, network interfaces are both popular products and have worked out of the box for years now.







  • jrgd@lemm.eetolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldonly as in free beer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If that is the case, the developer should have likely noted otherwise before closing the issue as the final piece of discussion. That is good to know that your experience hasn’t dropped the OS into base Windows 11. If as you say is true, the developer should also really spend some time cleaning up the README and clarify that base Tiny11 can actually be updated in-OS. I will still test in a VM later today to confirm that Tiny11 doesn’t actually erode or degrade on update for myself.


  • jrgd@lemm.eetolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldonly as in free beer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    From the Github README:

    Also, for the very first time, introducing tiny11 core builder! A more powerful script, designed for a quick and dirty development testbed. Just the bare minimun, none of the fluff. This script generates a significantly reduced Windows 11 image. However, it’s not suitable for regular use due to its lack of serviceability - you can’t add languages, updates, or features post-creation. tiny11 Core is not a full Windows 11 substitute but a rapid testing or development tool, potentially useful for VM environments.

    It literally says that it cannot be updated from a built OS install. You need to reinstall tiny11 by rebuilding the install image with a newer Windows 11 base image. Obviously it would be best to do this every time there is a security patch release for Windows 11.

    EDIT: Rereading further, the bigger Tiny11 image might be able to be updated in-OS. I’m going to dig through the ps1 scripts to see if the README holds up to that un-noted capability.

    EDIT2: I don’t see any registry edits that knock Windows Updater offline. I’ll test it in a VM to see if things work (from prebuilt when it eventually downloads). Though I am unsure at this moment if such an image’s changes will survive a Windows update at all.

    EDIT3: VM not tested yet, but an issue on the GitHub seems to corroborate my initial assumption.

    EDIT4: VM tested. Things claimed to be patched out (Edge) came back with one of the cumulative updates applied shortly after install. Other cumulative updates are being blocked (error instantly on attempt to install after download) (perhaps unintentionally). Image downloaded claimed to be for 23H2, but Windows 11 22H2 was installed, seemingly with no way to actually upgrade. I think my point stands.


  • jrgd@lemm.eetolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldonly as in free beer
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Do note that this system is liable to leave your computer vulnerable as it has no way to update itself from within the OS.

    This image would be fine for booting short-term VMs as long as you periodically rebuild and reinstall it, but not ready for consumer use.



  • jrgd@lemm.eetoLinux@lemmy.worldAre we (linux) ready for Arm devices?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Beyond the article being ancient at this point (in terms of AOSP and Android development lifetime), Stallman’s argument boils down to the same talking points of Free Software purism.

    To the first real point being transformed here: Android is not GNU/Linux because it does not contain much of the GNU Project’s software. While it’s correct to claim it’s not GNU/Linux, how does it not make it Linux still? Is Alpine Linux not considered “Linux” because it doesn’t contain GNU? Please elaborate on this point of Linux being Linux because it has GNU.

    To the second point of including proprietary drivers, firmware, and appplications: we once again meet the questionable argument of transforming an OS to something else. Points are made that Android doesn’t fit the GNU ideals due to its usage and inclusion of proprietary kernel modules, firmware, and userland applications. These are valid points to be made in that these additions muddy the aspect of Android (as packaged by Google and major smartphone manufacturers) being truly free software. However the same can be said about traditional “GNU/Linux distributions”. Any device running on x86 (Intel, AMD) will be subject to needing proprietary firmware in order to function with that firmware having a higher control level than the kernel itself, just as Android would. There is also the note that while it is less necessary now to have a functioning desktop, a good portion of hardware (NVidia, Broadcom, Intel, etc.) require proprietary kernel modules and/or userland drivers in order to have full functionality that the average user may want. Finally, there is proprietary applications as well. Some Linux desktops include proprietary applications like Spotify, Steam, Google Chrome by default. Are we really to also exclude an overwhelming majority of the biggest Linux distros as Linux as well being that they include proprietary software or rely on proprietary code in some fashion? GNU itself lists very few distros as GNU-approved.

    To note, AOSP does have a different userland environment than your standard Linux distro running X11 or Wayland. That is by far the best reason I could think of to classify Android as a different category of ‘Linux’ from say Debian, Fedora, OpenSUSE, Arch, Gentoo, Slackware, and others. However, AOSP is still capable of running with no proprietary userland software and can even be made to still run cli applications as well as run an X11 server that is capable of launching familiar desktop Linux applications. I really think that the arbitrary exclusion of Android from being Linux by virtue that RMS doesn’t think it fits with GNU ideals is silly. If there are better arguments to be said for why Android (especially AOSP) shouldn’t be seen as Linux with a different userland ecosystem rather than not Linux entirely, I’d love to see them. However, I remain unconvinced so far.