I just switched to CachyOS at the 18th and been running 100% Linux ever since. Woo!

Soo is 2026 the year of Linux desktop?

Oh

Very nice to see. Hopefully the trend continues.

It's what Macs use.

What's OS X ?

That http request diagram: windows in the day, linux in the night 😁

Hope the trend holds, would love to see Linux gradually grows. :)

My guess is that probably Linux, but change their user-agent to appear as Windows.

Yes, good. I want to convert everyone I know to Linux. Windows just sucks (she says, typing from a Windows OS, because the software she needs for her job isn't supported on Linux ;-;)

I hope these are actual users. What OS do scraping bots use?

Pupdate: TURNS OUT the reason the normal pinyin IME didn't have a simplified/traditional switch like everything seemed to indicate we SHOULD... was because we were missing the fcitx5-module-chttrans package!

*snootdesks.*

That should really be marked as a dependency or at LEAST a recommends.

-- Frost

I did not. Though, I do have the entirety of the Atari 2600 library on that SSD so if you want an example of many small files...

You should ensure data integrity with checksums and/or hashes.

Yes. Ext4 is far better (including efficiency) than FAT. A very modern FS versus one of the oldest and terribly inefficient... Lol

FAT typically has large cluster sizes, especially on large volumes. Ext4 has relatively small clusters. A tremendous amount of small files could possibly explain it. Did you happen to enable any compression for the volume?

Oh you're right yeah. I also saw an article also about exfat being opened source by Microsoft in 2019

FAT predates Windows. Lol. I think you might be thinking NTFS? That has been a cluster duck. But FAT was never that difficult to support.

In general EXT4 is better than FAT in terms if its cluster slack (how much space is wasted by minimum cluster size) and it's also way better at handling problems related to power outages and interruptions than FAT filesystems are.

I would first check carefully that all the files were actually copied. Often the simplest explanation is the correct one, in this case that some files weren't copied for some reason.

That said, I have seen something similar once, and the reason was something called sparse files. We had some database backup files on a FAT32 partition (don't ask why), and we copied them to an ext4 partition. We noticed that the copied files occupied about 1/4 less space than they did on FAT32. Turned out that the backup files contained large amounts of "empty" space (zeros bacially) and because FAT file systems don't support sparse files, that empty space occupied physical disk space on FAT32. On ext4 however, those empty parts didn't consume any physical disk space and thus the total disk usage was way lower.

Does your data include disk images for example? If so, this could be the reason.

Its less about efficiency and just about compatibility at least in terms of fat and ext4. Ext4 is open and was designed for Linux, where fat was for windows and was closed off and hard for Linux to support

I'm not sure about the file size diffs, maybe different default compression levels or a incomplete copy?

C developer here, so I think to help you all out a little bit on understanding Rust scenario. The problem is that a lot of us prefer to have single language development so that we're not forced to learn about Rust language or other languages.

Second problem is BIDIRECTIONAL FFI, because when we share code in C, almost every language can use and extend C code, but it's not true for Rust code however, it's unidirectional. Other language can't easily extend Rust code nor can it use Rust's libraries, but Rust could use C code with ease. I know people would say, "But Rust could expose all of those things." Well, LLVM which is written in C++ could've done the same, but they didn't, we don't have full access of LLVM code in C and we can't expect that in Rust code either.

Rust does have a reputation of being a prosecution complex in some spaces where I did get nagged on by rust folks to rewrite my project in Rust. I told them no and that I could defend my choices for memory safety and reliability by adhering to MISRA-C standard and using Frama-C for verification.

I don't hate on Rust, but I just want people to understand that there are wider scopes to consider in a larger project like Linux Kernel and that it can hurt us more if we start having more than 1 language in a already complicated project like Linux Kernel. Rust already have it's own operating system, why not work on that and extend it to compete with Linux Kernel? It's called Redox OS: https://redox-os.org/

I can see that Rust can make a lot of positive change to the Linux community, just that we need to treat it as a tool just like C, C++, and every other language.

They really need some good Konqi/Katie wallpaper with the newer designs. :)

cute! it has a retro-future vibe

@Kacerdias I mainly use Solus for basic things such as SQL, GIS, and general work in the Zen and Floorp browsers professionally. I don't have much interest in using this system for gaming.As for eopkg, it definitely has its kinks not being based on "pacman" or "sudo," but I'm cool with it for what I use it for.

I like the feel of it, but eopkg really holds it back. I found that many of the apps I rely on weren't an option with either native packages nor flatpak. I went over to CachyOS and found it less polished but the options for package deployment were much better. I guess the real question is what kind of use case you have.

Welcome to the arch based family, btw. How does Garuda compare to openSUSE Tumbleweed for you? Is one clearly better for you or is it mostly give and takes?