Seconded. Cannot speak of other static site generators, as Hugo is the only I know, but it IS a pain to make anything that deviates from the golden path that's shown in the documentation.
I experience somewhat frequent GPU crashes when playing Diablo3 under Wine with the integrated i3-4150 GPU, but the graphics stack recovers by itself in about a minute. I can then continue from where I left off, sans the application that crashed with it.
Under Windows the recovery is instant, there is an audible bell and a popup window in the taskbar saying something along the lines of: "The graphics driver has crashed and has been restarted". In any case by now I'm pretty sick of Linux fanboys making fun of people using other operating systems. Using Linux as a Desktop OS, especially if your are not given a chance to modify the installation is an exercise in self-flagellation.
It uses Chrome's built-in print-to-PDF functionality via Chrome Debug/DevTools Protocol. In other words it creates PDF files with real vector graphics and text, not just images embedded in PDF.
I didn't know that existed. How good is it with corner cases? HTML->PDF is a notoriously difficult problem; even generating PDF is. There are several software services which charge well for doing that (Docraptor, PrinceXML). If it's smooth and handles everything well, is there any reason someone should pay for them?
PDF generation (especially from a JavaScript-enhanced HTML page) has enough corner cases that it is typically best implemented with commercial support paying someone to polish away the rough edges.
There are many "free as in beer" (closed-source), freemium, and/or free trial options offered as a carrot leading to a commercial product. Most have a watermark and/or page count limitations.
It's available from the normal Chrome print menu, so you can test it yourself easily.
But to answer: I haven't used it extensively, but CSS and Javascript tend to make it a bit tricky. When you are viewing a webpage in the browser, you have one viewport, and scrolling can change the appearance or position of elements. Translating this to one long PDF is troublesome on some websites. As to what companies do that provide this as a service? I've got no clue, maybe brand this as their unique service? :D
It would be useful to be able to browse the sourcecode online, without actually cloning it.
It seems somewhat weird to use the VCS itself for the VCS being developed. Well, maybe that's just me. Until you offer the ability to browse sourcecode online, maybe mirror the repository to some online source hosting site and disallow issues tracking there?
I think anything is a great alternative to the Office at this point. In hindsight, LibreOffice's name must've been chosen by a fortune-teller..or a <strike>pessimist</strike> realist ;)
what's so bad about Office? I just switched from LO to Office and it's felt like taking a huge weight off my shoulders - all the weird little UI quirks and bugs are gone, and everything just works.
LibreOFfice its playing catch up with MS Office actually. I am all for open source but Office is something that Microsoft really gets right and now with their subscription model it became very cheap for everyday users so unless you are on Linux you have very little reason not to use Microsoft's suite.
Because the price is the same as buying it outright in the long run (assuming you use the newer versions as most do), its at least as good a deal as the outright purchase. For things that create value over the term of ownership, a subscription makes a lot more sense than a large up front cost. We do this model, but with more middlemen & machinations, for just about everything nowadays (houses, cars, student loans, etc.). The only difference is Microsoft isn't screwing you.
The value-add here is that Office comes with cloud storage, really great built-in sync, and a continuous stream of improvement. Amazingly, Office is still getting better, but now improvements are released by the month, not every 3-4 years.
It's more expensive to get the subscription even if you do upgrade regularly. And I don't think most people buy the latest version of Office with every release. And what "monthly improvements" are even needed? Office seems pretty feature complete for most use cases.
You also get several installs, cloud storage, and the IOS apps. I would buy it outright for home but for my users in the office the subscription model works great.
I personally use the home edition for my family. 4 family members have office / 1 TB onedrive with a single yearly subscription which is a fraction of the price I'd pay for a single perpetual license (and I have an extra user license to spare). It feels like a good value for me.
It gets regular updates. There is a version that you can just buy once, but it only gets updates for (I think) a year and then you have to buy a new one whenever you want an update.
The problem with this is: Office is pretty much feature complete for most uses, people don't need regular updates to their word processor. Microsoft has even removed quite a few features since the Office 97 days.
Retail Office gets updated about every three years. That's plenty, buying a subscription for Word seems hardly worth it.
> "I'm telling you to use different pins than ~all the other instructions on the web."
sigh Please, Please, provide reasons along with your arguments. Simply stating something doesn't help, especially when there is contradicting information floating around.
[continued..] You can't generalize, but you can assume. Quite likely many Thinkpads use the same piece of code to handle firmware password-checking. Once the code is changed, it'll likely propagate (slowly) inside the company to all of the new (or firmware-updated) laptops.
That being said, it's likely the firmware's failsafe-mechanism kicking in when it cannot access the memory chip that stores the password (because access to the chip is hindered).
Yet utilizing the "WP" (write protect) pin on the memory chip ought to do nothing in my opinion - unless the firmware tries to store something to the memory at boot time (which is entirely possible). On the other hand, forcing clock or data pins to ground - in effect disallowing any signalling via them - should be a sureproof way to force the firmware to trigger it's failsafe mechanism.
I'm not using the WP pin, I'm using the PROT pin. It forces the EEPROM to behave differently, because it signals it does not have a good power state. The EEPROM can be 'read', but the data it hands back is different. You can go read the spec sheets for the EEPROMs in question. You have the part numbers.
But I was more interested in the end-to-end test, as I expected others reading would also be:
SDL to SDA (the usual instructions given elsewhere) only works on some models.
PROT to GND appears to work on all. In my collection of ~ 30 machines, it works on all the models SCL to SDA does, as well as all the models SCL to SDA does not.
PROT to GND was the original hack as discovered around the time of the T20.
Ahh, my mistake. WP != PROT. Utilizing the PROT-pin appears to force memory chip's internal read&write protection flags active, causing read and write operations to fail (unless I understood incorrectly). This kind of information could be beneficial to others if it's correct: You could add it to your post?
You said it's because of a mix-up when reading documentation, but you said nothing about /why/ changing the write-protect pin's state should work - or why tying clock and data pins together should not.
To be fair, I cannot say with certainty why it works; I don't have code for the BIOS or EC. The CoreBoot and LibreBoot people might be able to shed some light.
The more interesting aspect, verified by testing, is that it does work.
In my own testing, SCL to SDA will not work on the T2X, T3X, T4X, T60, X2X, X3X, X4X, or X60. It does work on the T61/X61 and T400/500.
PROT to GND works on all of the above. I also tested it on an X230 (works), but I didn't check SCL to SDA on that machine.
thanks for the list of combinations of Thinkpad models regarding SCL/SDA and PROT/GND. I tried SCL/SDA on my T60, of course it did not work... Do you happen to know how to locate PROT and GND on the top of T60 mainboard? Unfortunately the guide on ja.axxs shows only where SCL and SDA is located. Really appreciate it, thanks!
GND and PROT are pins 31 and 32 on the same chip, right next to SCL and SDA on the 8356908. I don't know where PROT might be exposed on the top of the PCB, it very well might not be. I soldered leads directly to the chip to test.
I have developed a habit of skipping to the end of the whole page, and reading towards the beginning, paragraph-by-paragraph. Works..sometimes :D