I made LASIM! https://github.com/CMahaff/lasim
I currently have 3 accounts (big shock):
I’m pretty sure @ruud@lemmy.world has said before what he uses. I thought back in the day it was publicly listed with the expenses, but I couldn’t find it.
The most recent update I found was here: https://lemmy.world/post/75556
But it could definitely be old information, I’d take the other commenter’s advice and ask in the admin channel to be sure.
Doubling what Klaymore said, I’ve seen this “just work” as long as all partitions have the same password, no key files necessary.
That said, if you needed to use a key file for some reason, that should work too, especially if your root directory is one big partition. Keep in mind too that the luks commands for creating a password-based encrypted partition vs a keyfile-based encrypted partition are different, so you can’t, for example, put your plaintext password into a file and expect that to unlock a LUKS partition that was setup with a password.
But the kernel should be trying to mount your root partition first at boot time where it will prompt for the password. After that it would look to any /etc/crypttab entries for information about unlocking the other partitions. In that file you can provide a path to your key file, and as long as it’s on the same partition as the crypttab it should be able to unlock any other partitions you have at boot time.
It is also possible, as one of your links shows, to automatically unlock even the root partition by putting a key file and custom /etc/crypttab into your initramfs (first thing mounted at boot time), but it’s not secure to do so since the initramfs isn’t (and can’t be) encrypted - it’s kind of the digital equivalent of hiding the house key under the door mat.
I know for me, at least with gnome, toggling between performance, balanced, and battery saver modes dramatically changes my battery life on Ubuntu, so I have to toggle it manually to not drain my battery life if it’s mostly sitting there. I don’t know if Mint is the same, but just throwing out the “obvious” for anyone else running Linux on a laptop.
Out of curiosity, what switch are you using for your setup?
Last time I looked, I struggled to find any brand of “home tier” router / switch that supported things like configuring vlans, etc.
Maybe I am not thinking of the access control capability of VLANs correctly (I am thinking in terms of port based iptables: port X has only incoming+established and no outgoing for example).
I think of it like this: grouping several physical switch ports together into a private network, effectively like each group of ports is it’s own isolated switch. I assume there are routers which allows you to assign vlans to different Wi-Fi access points as well, so it doesn’t need to be literally physical.
Obviously the benefits of vlans over something actually physical is that you can have as many as you like, and there are ways to trunk the data if one client needs access to multiple vlans at once.
In your setup, you may or may not benefit, organizationally. Obviously other commenters have pointed out some of the security benefits. If you were using vlans I think you’d have at a minimum a private and public vlan, separating out the items that don’t need Internet access from the Internet at all. Your server would probably need access to both vlans in that scenario. But certainly as you say, you can probably accomplish a lot of this without vlans, if you can aggressively setup your firewall rules. The benefit of vlans is you would only really need to setup firewall rules on whatever vlan(s) have Internet access.
I ran into the same thing. I’ve always just worked around it, but I believe I did find the solution at one point (can’t find the link now).
But if I am remembering right, I believe you need to manually create a bridge between the two networks - by default it isolates the VMs from TrueNAS itself for security reasons.
Sorry I can’t link the exact fix right now, but hopefully this will help you Google the post I found on the subject.
Not an expert myself, but I think chips that truly sip power not only have a much lower floor but take even more aggressive actions to reduce power when idle.
Certainly with the right software tuning you could aggressively throttle the CPU to save power - I’m just not sure how much power it would actually save.
I did find this really good article on reducing the Raspberry Pi Zero 2W power consumption: https://www.cnx-software.com/2021/12/09/raspberry-pi-zero-2-w-power-consumption/
I saw this complaint in another post online (paraphrased):
The screen and use of a Pi seem at odds with each other. The screen is ultra-low power, but there are of course huge drawbacks for usability. Meanwhile the CPU is very powerful, but chews through, comparatively, a lot of power quickly.
They argued that it would be better to either pair the Pi with a better screen for a more powerful/usable handheld, or go all in on longevity and use some kind of low-power chip to pair with the screen for a terminal that could last for days.
… I’ve got to say, it’s a fair point. A low power hand-held that could run Linux and run for days would be pretty cool, even if it was underpowered compared to a Pi. No idea what you could use for such a thing though.
Yeah sorry that’s probably poorly named - it gets built on an Ubuntu Github “Action” and I’ve never gone and validated if it worked across other Linux distros - almost certainly does though, it’s a pretty generic binary.
Hey thanks for sharing my tool! If anyone has any questions, let me know!
That link seems to 404. I will IM you shortly.
Sure thing.
Do you get any additional information in your error log?
If not, would you be open to running a version with additional debugging statements to help identify the cause of the failures?
I know there is an issue when .world is overloaded where this happens, but if it’s happening constantly it has to be something specific with your account vs mine.
LASIM author here - there does not appear to be any API changes in 0.18.4, and it seemed to work fine with my testing.
I’ve updated the table on the Github README to reflect this.
Your Lemmy profile settings include an option to not show bot accounts.
Maybe I’m completely misremembering things, but at some point wasn’t there a hotfix to Lemmy that hard-limited how many comments a thread could have? Does anyone know if there’s a maximum and if so how many?
Just wondering, cause uh, I could see this one having a lot of comments.
My understanding is that right now Lemmy is very poor at “catching up” on missed content in general. You can see it anytime there is prolonged downtime that the same post across multiple instances gets out of sync. So most likely in the event of re-federation, as Lemmy is written today, the old content would not be received - just new content. Hopefully things are improved in the future
So I asked about this once before, and my understanding is that since beehaw defederated:
So even though lemmy.world didn’t block beehaw, it is still effectively cut off in all meaningful ways.
You could still see:
Unfortunately it doesn’t look like there is a way to customize this message right now (without building Lemmy altered from source that is).
Relevant code: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/blob/main/src/shared/components/app/error-page.tsx
Relevant translation file: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-translations/blob/main/translations/en.json (line 235 and 236 at time of writing).
There is nothing built into Lemmy, though there is at least one active PR working on it.
In the meantime I made this tool: https://github.com/CMahaff/lasim
It copies subscriptions, blocks, and some profile settings.
There are others too if you search for them.
In fairness, my understanding is that there are a lot of complications with adding distributed power to existing grids. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen, just that there are engineering and safety challenges when power is coming from “everywhere” vs centrally.
And of course, there’s a lot of energy companies lobbying against clean power sources as well.