Re: [GTALUG] mbox vs Maildir [was Re: Linux friendly email providers?]

| From: Howard Gibson via talk |I figured that separate email files would be using up a lot of | sectors, but my bandwidth is limited by my Blu-ray discs. My actual | backup is a gzipped tar file. Sectors should not be a problem, should | they? Uncompressed TAR format:

Re: [GTALUG] mbox vs Maildir [was Re: Linux friendly email providers?]

On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 01:20:20 -0500 (EST) "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" wrote: > You mentioned that you were running out of space on your system. If a lot > of that space is mail messages, I would bet that Maildir is costing you a > lot of it. Each message is taking a multiple of the

Re: [GTALUG] Browsers (and Thorium to be specific)

Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote on 2023-11-24 08:07: Thorium is basic Chrome that is compile-time optimized for new CPUs. Still does Chrome sync and plugin store. Won't run on any system that doesn't have an AVX2-capable CPU. As a result, it claims a conventional Chrome

Re: [GTALUG] Linux Unicorns

| From: ac via talk | I have been wondering about tech unicorns and Linux. It seems to me that Linux has won and been commoditized on the server side. No high-level discussion needs to address this. Several distros are good enough and almost interchangeable in abilities. On the PC side, if

Re: [GTALUG] Linux Unicorns

On 2023-11-24 09:50, ac via talk wrote: I have been wondering about tech unicorns and Linux. WARNING : do not read beyond this point if you are not at least somewhat bored. - reading drivel is a choice, and this does at least have a warning label :) [snip to keep those with short attention

Re: [GTALUG] Browsers (and Thorium to be specific)

Thorium is basic Chrome that is compile-time optimized for new CPUs. Still does Chrome sync and plugin store. Won't run on any system that doesn't have an AVX2-capable CPU. As a result, it claims a conventional Chrome experience but noticeably faster. Apparently the same

Re: [GTALUG] Browsers (and Thorium to be specific)

On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:24:20 -0500 Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote: > So ... nobody uses Thorium? > i am having a google free black friday... so, Thorium is a web browser? which natively does not support .js? or supports it? cool name, Thorium. sounds like something like kryptonite for Thor

Re: [GTALUG] Browsers (and Thorium to be specific)

So ... nobody uses Thorium? On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 4:21 AM Ron / BCLUG via talk wrote: > Don Tai via talk wrote on 2023-11-23 15:46: > > > I by default don't run JS, and then with the Noscript plugin, grant js > > access. Many sites will block you without JS running. Though I depend on > > FF,

[GTALUG] Linux Unicorns

I have been wondering about tech unicorns and Linux. WARNING : do not read beyond this point if you are not at least somewhat bored. - reading drivel is a choice, and this does at least have a warning label :) Does anyone on the list actually know (as in personal experience) whether/which (or

Re: [GTALUG] Browsers (and Thorium to be specific)

Don Tai via talk wrote on 2023-11-23 15:46: I by default don't run JS, and then with the Noscript plugin, grant js access. Many sites will block you without JS running. Though I depend on FF, which usually works, I don't mind if web sites crack and don't render well. I ran with default no

Re: [GTALUG] mbox vs Maildir [was Re: Linux friendly email providers?]

D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote on 2023-11-23 22:20: I don't remember seeing that corruption in the last few decades of using mbox. I didn't notice it 'til transferring providers and looking back at old message folders. No idea how long it's been lurking around. Probably nothing of value