If that’s your intend than it might be better to pick individual arch wiki pages or improve the entry documentation. Many people refer to there from all distro because of its volume.

A “how to read tech documentation” could add value for this target group.

User perspective:

If you want something big I’d pitch nixos. As in the core distribution. It’s a documentation nightmare and as a user I had to go over options search and then trying to figure out what they mean more often than I found a comprehensive documentation.

That would be half writing and half coordinating writers though I suspect.

Another great project with mixed quality documentation is openhab. It fits the bill of more backend heavy side and the devs are very open in my experience. I see it actually as superior in its core concepts to the way more popular home assistant in every aspect except documentation!

That said: thanks for putting the effort in! ♥

Ah that would make sense, thanks!

I haven’t found (while cross reading ) details about why the “highly improved” didn’t make it to upstream openwrt?

The screenshot had has the criteria included though. Relevant part: either be for children or for everyone.

The first link goes into amazing detail on that. In short: all your information concerning location as well as current IP and some other metadata gets send to a basically unknown company with no transparency on how that data is handled.

I highly recommend reading the first, linked post though!

Cups

linux printing server - if you want to share a printer over network or just use one locally on a linux machine.

(not OP but same boat) Doesn’t really matter to me because google knows my servers external IP which is a non-issue: I don’t expect google to try to attack me individually but crawl data about me. There is no automatic link between my server and my personal browsing habits.

In terms of attack vector vs ease of use , self hosting searxng is a nobrainer for me - but I do have an external server available for things like that anyway so no additional overhead needed.

OK now I have to escape to really smart assery and assume that’s what I meant the whole time ;)

Edit code 2 describes something that went wrong - but that something telling you that it went wrong was the tar binary which therefor most have been valid to evaluate that!

Under no circumstances did I assume that the hint towards help itself would’ve been an exit code 0, no sir!

To be honest: if I’d designed that bomb it would’ve exploded in my face for trying to be too clever.

tar

Done. That’s a valid command, no error code, nothing. KISS!

A Dockerfile itself is the instruction set. There is a certain minimum requirement expected from a server admin that differs from end-user requirements.

The ease of docker obfuscates that quite a bit but if you want to go full bare metal (or full AWS or GCS, etc etc) then you need to manage the full admin part as well - including custom deployments.

No worries I phrased that quite weird I think.

A NAS is only more power efficient if the additional power of a full server is not used. If for some reason the server is still needed than the NAS will be additional power consumption and not save anything.

(for example I run some quite RAM and compute heavy things on my server which no stock NAS could handle I think).

That would replace the computer with the NAS though and is not true for a server that you’d want to extend, right?

Is that 370watt across all of them or per fat server? I ask because three m5 sound like a lot of power drain!.

And thanks for sharing!

I didn’t know that about the immich app, thanks for pointing it out!

Then you need a third application (e.g. syncthing) to replicate the auto upload functionality of Nextcloud.

Personally I don’t want to have same functionality in a different stack because of pipeline issues. Doesn’t solve OPs issue I just wanted to point out that your solution might have drawbacks OP didn’t see at first glance :)

I will borrow The fisher-Price phrasing, thank you for that! Fully agree on the cura part.

I can’t answer that and it’s a valid question in my opinion. If I had to guess I’d speculate about disagreements in code style, build pipeline or similar.

Although I’d love to agree superslicer has sadly nowhere near the development power of prusa behind them - and feature parity is rarely given, basically any release of the two has “oh I want both of those!” (don’t know if it’s spelled correctly but arachnid mode for example was hyped to a point I checked back with prusa after a few months).

I just want to point it out in case people expect a “prusaslicer” but better in every regard :)

Thank you! That’s really interesting, the performance with a pi 3 was way worse - even more than the pure spec difference would’ve lead me to believe.

The OCR devs have made a really awesome job!