I work for AMD. To be clear, my new job is about integrating ROCm into the distribution not just about shipping ROCm packages that can run on Debian.
I'll be doing things like creating new packages in main, helping to get support for the HIP language embedded into existing dpkg tooling, helping to get GPU architecture awareness integrated into the Debian CI infrastructure, helping to enable ROCm support in other libraries and applications packaged for Debian, and ensuring that everything in Debian is successfully imported into the Ubuntu universe repositories.
Integrating HIP support into Debian so that it feels as natural as C or C++ and 'just works' across dozens of GPUs is a job for more than one person. That is why I'm glad there have been so many volunteers in the community stepping forward to help with various pieces.
The comments were quite often in French, however! Until relatively recently, the OCaml compiler would also sometimes emit error messages in French in some obscure cases.
How long ago was this "relatively recently"? When I translated all the remaining French comments in the OCaml compiler nearly 10 years ago, there were already no warnings nor error messages in French.
Note that this is an error message from the ocamldoc tool, and not an error message from the OCaml compiler itself. Funnily enough, looking that the repository history, this French error message was introduced in the very first version of ocamldoc in 2002 and went undetected (or unreported) for 9 years. Thanks for the historical tidbit!
What are they supposedly trying to do with Warhammer (40k)? I am aware that Amazon has the rights and are working on developing something, but apart from the Secret Level episode (which was good), has there been any details?
While some of what Amazon has made is terrible, much is good. They produce so much that the average quality is pretty close to the global average, so I find predictions challenging.
The rage bait on the internet claims they are changing the lore to accommodate DEI. Don't shoot the messenger plz. I'm just saying I understand why the creative content owners are concerned about Amazon retconning lore and maybe want to see how things like Warhammer play out first.
It might be a moot point anyway. If we can consider Disney a bellwether¹, expect more content producers to step back on the diversity front.
Personally I think it completely depends on the story and artistic direction. Wolf Hall (casting mostly reflects historical appearances of characters portrayed) can exist next to Bridgerton (explicitly colour-blind casting). Both have their merits.
I think most rage bait about the Warhammer series is manufactured by content farm channels to generate clicks - the series wasn’t even officially in development until a few weeks ago.
There’s an entire subgenre of YouTube channels that consist solely of creators updating videos promising that they have inside information on the creative conflicts at Lucasfilm/Amazon/etc, all of which happen to align perfectly with whatever the fandom is outraged with that week.
This guys channel is a great example - most of the channels discussing “female custodes Henry cavil warhammer 40k tv series” Amazon follow a similar format.
Edit:
I’d also add that I don’t think Rings of Power is bad because they cast minorities - most of the actors are fine, really. The plotting and pacing is just horrendous. In a show that has 5+ active plot lines and threads scattered all over the world, they’ve spent a quarter of their screen time on a plot line that’s completely disconnected not just from the lore but from the wider story being told and doesn’t look like it’s going to connect anytime soon. Which is funny, because I’d imagine Amazon execs felt that they were obligated to include that plot line (the Hobbit one) to appease viewers.
Amazon has a diversity team in the entertainment side of business that literally changes casting and content to fit their DEI goals. It often happens in awkward and forced ways, and that is affecting things like this Bond controversy. Most of this is motivated simply by Amazon’s own DEI culture. But part of it is because the award shows have criteria for eligibility (for best picture etc) that require meeting diversity and other requirements that have nothing to do with how entertaining the show is. Since those creating or participating in these shows don’t want to be ineligible, they do whatever it takes, including retconning.
I worked for AWS for 3.5 years. Their only culture is to treat all employees like shit, a PIP culture and one that they know they can continue being tech’s worst employer (despite the newest Leadership Principle) because all of the H1B visa holders will do damn near anything to keep their jobs.
This isn’t an H1B Visa holder rant. It’s an indictment to the program that keeps them beholden to a company.
As an internal employee I never saw anything but a perfunctory “ally” programs and a bunch of talk about “diversity” and of course we had to watch the videos and use language that didn’t offend anyone.
FWIW: I’m Black and I found some of the things that were suppose to trigger me or some of the “green washing” that were suppose to give me a warm and fuzzy eye rolling.
To be clear, I had a customer facing role (AWS Professional Services). Amazon wasn’t about to send anyone incompetent to talk to their large clients I don’t care what kind of initiatives they had.
> But part of it is because the award shows have criteria for eligibility (for best picture etc) that require meeting diversity and other requirements that have nothing to do with how entertaining the show is. Since those creating or participating in these shows don’t want to be ineligible, they do whatever it takes, including retconning.
Perhaps I'm a little bit too rebellious to be a culture fit for the movie industry, but if this is the case, I would be very encouraged to create an a show that is outstanding, but violates the DEI criteria of the award, so that the awards become a target of ridiculation for not including "my" show because of stupid DEI criteria.
I wonder if these are the same people who whined about DC casting a black woman to play an orange alien from Tamaran?
They also criticized Disney for having a Black Captain America in the movies even though it was clear to any Marvel comics fans that this was always going to be the case.
When you get people showing up to events in neo Nazi iconography, being allowed to stay and play, and then the IP owner has to clarify (again) that they don't actually support hate groups? [0]
Or the community makes memes about a certain type of fan? [1]
That feels like a lot.
And I get it -- lots of people are too dumb for satire.
But when GW plays with fire they have a social safety responsibility to be extra cautious, not laissez faire 'Who could have ever forseen that burning trash in my house might lead to the entire building catching fire?'
It's a very unfortunate thing that the 40k community has mythologized this large contingent of Nazis that is allegedly omnipresent yet never even a creepshot of them surfaces at events. I feel like many more people would love to join the community (which is great) but are scared off by this self-slander the community puts on itself.
Every fandom - Star Trek, Star Wars, LOTR, Marvel, Doctor Who, D&D, gaming, anime, all of them - have garnered a vocal contingent of incels raging about "DEI" and "woke" and trying as hard as possible to shit in the pool and ruin the fun for everyone else. It's the legacy of GamerGate.
Probably a hot take but if you use the word 'incel' to label people you are kinda trash. If you use sexuality to label people in a bad way/try to demean them (especially when one of the worlds you use is involuntary I.E. out of their control), you are definitely trash.
Incelism has nothing to do with sexuality. Incel culture labels people - especially women - in bad ways and demeans them all the time. It's misogyny as an identity, it is not an immutable personal characteristic. Their participation in that culture and their behavior is entirely within their control.
There have not been any details. There have been YouTubers making things up and desperately pretending Henry Cavill is their champion standing bravely against "woke".
This is not the case in Haskell, because let-bindings can be self-referential, while lambdas cannot (without using a fixed point combinator). Also, in most functional languages, a let-binding causes type generalisation, which is not the case for a lambda.
Why not essentially treat it as a cross compilation scenario? NixOS is also source based, but I don't think such a migration would be particularly difficult. You'd use the 32-bit off_t gcc to compile a glibc with 64-bit off_t, then compile a 64-bit off_t gcc linked against that new glibc, and so on. The host compiler shouldn't matter.
I always understood the challenge as binary compatibility, when you can't just switch the entire world at once.
Nixos has it easier here because they don't require packages to be "installed" before building code against them. For Gentoo, none of their build scripts (ebuilds) are written to support that. It's plausible that they might change the embuild machinery so that this kind of build (against non-installed packages) could work, but it would need investigation and might be a difficult lift to get it working for all packages.
"treat it as a cross compilation scenario" is essentially what the post discusses when they mention "use a different CHOST". A CHOST is a unique name identifying a system configuration, like "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" (etc). Gentoo treats building for different CHOSTs as cross compiling.
NixOS isn't the same kind of source-based. At some level, even Debian could be said to be source based: there's nothing stopping you from deciding to build every package from source before installing it, and obviously the packages are themselves built from source at some point.
NixOS sits between Debian and Gentoo, as it maintains an output that's capable of existing independently of the rest of the system (like Debian) but is designed to use the current host as a builder (like Gentoo). Gentoo doesn't have any way to keep individual builds separate from the system as a whole, as intimated in the article, so you need to work out how to keep the two worlds separate while you do the build.
I think what they're suggesting winds up being pretty similar to what you suggest, just with the right plumbing to make it work in a Gentoo system. NixOS would need different plumbing, I'm not sure whether they've done it yet or how but I can easily imagine it being more straightforward than what Gentoo is needing to do.
There absolutely will be problems with different Nix profiles that aren't updated together; for example, if you update some packages installed in your user's profile but not the running system profile. But this is common enough with other glibc ABI breakage that folks tend to update home and system profiles together, or know that they need to reboot.
Where it will be hell is running Nix-built packages on a non-NixOS system with non-ABI-compatible glibc. That is something that desperately needs fixing on the glibc side, mostly from the design of nss and networking, that prevent linking against glibc statically.
> Where it will be hell is running Nix-built packages on a non-NixOS system with non-ABI-compatible glibc.
This isn't a thing. Nix-built binaries all each use the hardcoded glibc they were built with. You can have any number of glibc's simultaneously in use.
Not at all! Lynx is a quite serviceable Gopher client, and it is available in most package repositories. For Emacs users, elpher is available, and it is very comfortable to use. Far more than modern browsers, really.
A lot of thoughts [1] have been put into the usr merge, and compatibility with unix is one of them, and one other unix that has done this merge is Solaris, so Linux distros doing the merge are not even that special.
The best answer is that you probably don't want to use Futhark for that - it's a specialised, rather restricted language. There are ways to encode irregular arrays, but it's not even remotely as ergonomic as in other languages (it can be plenty fast, however). For a particularly simple example, see https://futhark-lang.org/examples/triangular.html
In the future, or in a future similar language, one might well imagine an ability to "box" arrays, like in APL, which would allow true "arrays of arrays" with no restrictions on sizes.
As messy as ROCm's packaging is, I can't imagine spending all day every day trying to fix it.