I use quarto: https://quarto.org/
The big thing I like is that it has fulltext local search, built in and easy to enable.
Search is possible on hugo, but it's not built in, you have to get a plugin, etc etc. Same for many other options you mentioned.
Heres my website: https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/
Big bluebutton is now integrated into Canvas, an open source learning management software (LMS) that every school I have went to has used.
Docker doesn't do this anymore. Their install script got moved to "only do this for testing".
Use a convenience script. Only recommended for testing and development environments.
Now, their install page recommends packages/repos first, and then a manual install of the binaries second.
Firstly, this blog is mostly SEO spam and is probably one of the worst written articles I've ever seen. The article itself is more keywords than content. Even the headline is garbage, persisting after reboots is a normal feature of almost all most malware types, including rootkits. In fact, I'd say a lot of cybersecurity blogs are like this, hyping up mundane malware that presents no special threat for the clicks.
But I'll break this down anyways.
The first bit about the dynamic linker, means doing things like restricting the files an app has access to, in order to prevent manipulation of how code libraries and modules are loaded, in order to prevent the injection of a malicious library. This can be done within the system, and often is by default, like how sudo refuses to load libraries it doesn't like.
The second bit is literally just recommending you require a password to do admin things. Of course, there's a lot more nuance to it. Access controls, controlling what user on a system has access to what can become a lot more fine grained, but for the kinds of malware that these articles report on, an admin password will stop them.
I can spiral my tongue, so that the front part is fully upsidr down - but only to the left. I can't rotate it to the right at all for some reason, it's like the equivalent muscles are missing.
The new mars helicoptor, ingenuity, runs linux.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/19/22291324/linux-perseverance-mars-curiosity-ingenuity
Their solution is to hold two copies of memory and double check operations as much as possible, and if any difference is detected they simply reboot. Ingenuity will start to fall out of the sky, but it can go through a full reboot and come back online in a few hundred milliseconds to continue flying.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26181763
Dunno if future one's will run linux though, since this is just an experiment.
By a twitch streamer vtuber: https://github.com/cyberkaida/reverse-engineering-assistant
An AI assistant that hooks into Ghidra, explaining what things do.
Nothing that is more questionable than lxd, which now requires a contributor license agreement, allowing canonical to not open source their hosted versions, despite lxd being agpl.
Thankfully, it's been forked as incus, and debian is encouraging users to migrate.
But yeah. They haven't said what makes proxmox's license questionable.
https://the-guild.dev/blog/judging-open-source-by-github-stars
On phone rn, but I'd love to see someone run the fake star checking project at projects like this.
Yes.
Ubuntu and debian both use apt, but differing repos. Different versions of ubuntu/debian use different repos, with newer/older software.
I mentioned an alternative to the what these websites do, using a package manager to install these instead of their bash scripts.
Both of the bash scripts you mentioned as an example are being used to install software. If you have examples of bash scripts that do things other than install software, then it's worth discussing how to handle those.
However, the reason why bash is so popular for usecases like configuration scripts or an Arch install script though, is because no other software besides wget/curl and bash is required to get it. Having to get an extra tool on the Arch install iso just to run an install script in bash, or to run a script that installs tools on a fresh, clean install, somewhat defeats the point of the script being written in bash imo.
Bash is inherently insecure. I consider security not just issues with malice, but also footguns like the steam issues mentioned above. Centralizing all the bash scripts to a "repo" doesn't fix the issues with arbitrary bash scripts.
And if you are concerned about malice, then the bash scripts almost always download a binary that does further arbitrary code execution and cannot be audited. What's the difference between a bash script from the developers website and a binary from the developers website?