118
By Default, Signal Doesn't Recall
(signal.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
118 points (96.1% liked)
Privacy
37953 readers
535 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
There's an easy way to thoroughly and permanently remove the recall feature.
Install this
This is brilliant, but I like this & this.
Yeah, I'm actually on CachyOS now. I just always point newcomers to Mint because it's easy and well supported.
Not a newbie since 2001 (but moved to Mint)
Don't get me wrong, Mint is great for everyone. I was using it primarily for ages, and I've been using Linux for decades as well.
I didn't mean it as recommending arch or gentoo to new Linux users.
How's CachyOS been for you? I've compiled a few repo packages myself & am in the process of testing Gentoo.
It's been great so far. Minimalistic in its philosophy (even with a choice of DE, it doesn't install the typical slew of utility applications and such), and it's easily the fastest distro I've ever used. I've had almost zero problems with Steam and Heroic. Overall I think I'm gonna stick with it for the foreseeable future.
If your first priority is speed, would clear Linux be better? Though I can see the appeal in a more performant Arch.
Edit:
What problems did you encounter? Would they also have affected Arch?
Yeah, they were common to Arch. Specifically, Steam would cause the entire system to stutter for a good 30 seconds when starting it up. Found a tip online about it doing something with some extra config files, followed the tip and now it's working fine.
Even using the CachyOS versions of Proton and Wine libraries (which have the same kind of optimizations applied as the rest of the OS) has worked flawlessly, and my games are smoother than they've ever been. Pretty impressed with it overall.
How much of a difference do you notice in practice? Do you think you could see similiar gains by compiling, for example, Wine & some libraries with
-march=native& maybe-O3?Note:
-march=nativedoes imply-mtune=native, at least on gcc, unless you specify another tune yourself. Some people assume that it isn't the case, but it's stated in the man page:Sorry for the arch/tune rant.
No worries, I'm here for it!
It's a noticeable improvement to me, but probably only marginal to the layperson. I haven't gotten around to more thorough profiling yet (the included btop++ profiler actually caused my games to crash), but I get the impression my PC is utilizing a lot more of its capabilities (based on performance, fan noise, etc), though maybe I'm just confirming my own biases.
I'm guessing you might get similar gains by compiling manually, but the nice thing with CachyOS is that it's already compiled (likely with other optimizations as well, I haven't looked too far into it). I have the technical skills to compile manually, but not the time or energy, so it's a great solution for me.
As you use Cachy, you probably already knew, but Arch compiles for x86_64_v1 (all 64-bit x86 CPUs). While some packages (glibc, I think & codecs, for example) use compiler magic & assembly to use vector instructions when available, most packages compiled for Arch cannot make use of them. Some programs feel much faster when compiling them myself.
I wonder if clear Linux (Intel's distro) would have any noticeable improvement i performance? I think that Cachy might use a few of their patches.
Note: I'm very much not an Intel shill. I wouldn't want to actually use it, just interested in the performance.
Yeah, the defacto Arch packages are only compiled for v1, but CachyOS has compiled a lot of the core libraries for v3/v4 (including Wine), which is where I think I'm seeing some improvements. I'm sure the performance would be more optimized by compiling myself, but I don't have the time or patience for it right now.
Lemme shill some as well; https://voidlinux.org/download/
What're the benefits of using Void over something like Arch? I've been interested in trying it out for a while, but haven't really gotten around to it yet.
Compared to Arch the packages in Void aren't the newest aka it's not a "bleeding edge" distro so by it's nature it's generally considered to be more stable. They even call themselves the Stable Rolling Release.
Then again compared to Arch, there is no Arch User Repository, but there is XBPS-src which is package builder which can build packages from other popular distros like Debian or Fedora with their .deb and .rpm files. They are sandboxed by default and require no root and. You can build packages yourself and there are also a lot of templates in XBPS-src.
Speaking XBPS, that is Void's very own package manager I believe it stands for eXtreme Binary Package System. It's also completely original to Void. It's a smart, versatile and very fast (second only to Pacman I think) tool.
Unlike Arch. Void doesn't use the nowadays standart SystemD Init system and instead uses Runit which is compared to SystemD more minimalistic, pretty simple to understand and overall faster Init system. Where everything is accomplished by linking form /etc/sv/ to /var/service/ with "ln - s".
Void also supports the C libraries. The standart GNU libc (glibc) and musl. Glibc with support for more software and musl generally considered to be more secure. Also in my humble opinion glibc Void is great for desktop systems and musl Void is good choice for headless home server.
Lastly just like Arch it's a minimalist distro so you can have way more control over system without too much headache and can pretty easily replace packages like sudo with something like opendoas.
I think Void one of the best Linux distros. I'm going to shamelessly fanboy it to the end of my days. One major issue for me that the official documentation is always kinda lacking for and I have to experiment. But yeah there you have it. Hope I didn't bore ya.
I though Void also supported systemd. Though, it would take away some advantages of Void, as it doesn't support musl IIRC.
I've heard Void fans singing praises for its package manager. It's one of the few distros where its users are really passionate about that, along with Arch, Gentoo & Alpine (IIRC). How good is the support for compiling certain repo packages yourself?
Does musl or a lack of systemd cause many problems?
Does Void have good support for ZFS? I run a small server at home & like to experiment. It's currently running Debian, but I'm crazy enough to consider dual (or triple when I finally decide to put BSD on it) booting on a server.
All in all, sounds like it's a lot more interesting than I thought. I'll definitely give it a try, if not on a server, at least a desktop. Though, I still think I'll switch to Gentoo for my daily driver.
Not at all! I'm a huge nerd, so I love learning about things like this. Thank you for the detailed ~~propaganda~~ comment!
P.S.
Do you happen to know if support for Rust (the best language at the time of writing) C standard libraries like relibc or c-gull is planned?
Edit: Fixed striketrough, I think.
Second edit: It works now. Why does each Markdown flavor have slightly different, incompatible syntax?
With Void most of the packages I use and want are either in the main repo, non-free repo or multilib repo. I compiled only few packages which I wanted or needed like Brave Browser or drivers for my graphical tablet and few more. Once you get a proper grasp of it the process is nothing that hard.
As for SystemD I was able to always substitute one way or another so It's pretty painless for me personally. Thought It might be a nightmare for someone who spent years on distro like Debian.
Can't comment on ZFS as I have not used it on Void but some guys on unofficial Telegram group for Void said it's smooth.
Speak of the devil. I was also thinking of trying Gentoo although I will probably do 1 or 2 test installs in VM and after that install it only onto my old Lenovo ThinkPad. Maybe I'll try using Artix next for my daily driver. It's been some time since I used anything based on Arch.
Yeah. Definitely give it a spin atleast in a VM. Although I'm more of C++ guy myself I wish you luck Rust bro ;)
Do you have a reason not to use systemd? Yes, it might be slower to boot than other inits, but the units are so nice. (Not trying to convert you, just curious about why you seem to avoid it)
Installing Gentoo is fun! It can be done without install media. Just extract the stage3 archive to a partition, mount system directories correctly & just chroot in! Now you can have the handbook open in a browser next to the chroot. Though, I haven't finished the install yet. I've had it in a half-done state for a while.
I can program in C++ & don't have much against it, I just love Rust. Also, for security, Rust is just better. Everyone makes misrakes, so why not make the compiler check your work? Especially when it comes to concurrency. With Rust, never I have to about worry race conditions & data races again. (Kind-of trying to convert you, but Rust isn't perfect, or ready for everything yet, sadly)
With the compilation, I was wondering how good the support for partially compiling dependencies was. For example:
packages: foo, bar, baz
bar depends on foo
baz depends on bar
What happens if I compile bar myself?
If foo updates, I may need to rebuild bar, I need to do that manually on Arch.
What about baz? It depends. It might work with my locally compiled bar, or it might not. Either way, pacman doesn't care.
I've been toying around with a new Rust-written™®© package manager that would support that. It's still very early in development & I have a few other personal projects in the way, too.
A few thoughts I have about it:
This is still very early in development, but I'd like to get it done at sone point.
It would combine the worst parts of both Arch & Gentoo (compilation, no use flags, complex dependency solving) in a gradual way (build the fish shell [yes, I use fish. I used to use zsh with plugins, but fish just did everything, but better & faster] today, next week build ffmpeg & dependents, next month, build libc & watch most of the system get built).
It would be nice to support parallel building of unrelated packages, as not everything scales well.
Dependency cycles/conflicts/versions are going to be nightmarish to solve for repo packages, then it also needs to work for AUR.
I'm not sure if I'll ever get the package manager to a usable state, though.
That's quite the project you took upon yourself. As I've said before I wish you luck with your endeavors and hope you won't fall into production dark pit.
Thanks. I'm still not completely serious about it, but I've given some thought to how the project would be laid out. I have some code, but not that much, under a few thousand loc. I wonder if it would be accepted into the extra repository. In Arch, the AUR is completely unofficial. The wiki documents many things related to it, but otherwise, the tooling kind of pretends that it doesn't exist & it's completely "unsupported" officially. The rules of the extra repository specify that pacman wrappers aren't allowed, but doesn't mention the AUR, IIRC. This wouldn't be a wrapper, but would support the AUR. I wonder how it would be handled, or would AUR support be patched out?
I can't tell. I don't exactly remember the policy but if you decide to take it more seriously and even if they wouldn't support you 100% I belive that you could find compromise through discussion.
I'd like to take it more seriously, but I don't really feel confident about being able to finish it.