Fair enough. As long it’s simple commands it’s fine, but when going to do platform builds then attach to release it’s a pain.

Me with gh’s CI

It’s mostly that Librewolf is a bit like incognito mode by default and it may be confusing for new users.

If you really want to go power mode you can create multiple profiles with different cookie policies. Great to organise yourself and keep cookies where they belong

Either you go the firefox account way (librewolf has it turned off by default but you can turn it back up)

Or you go the manual way. Go to your about:profiles, open both directory for your profile data, and the folders in the corresponding librewolf folder (that you can check by going in about:profiles on librewolf).

Here’s two tips:

• Shield icon to disable protection for the site if it break
• Icon to the right to enable cookie preservation for the site.

This is the essential thing to learn for librewolf. The settings are quite aggressive so you may need to disable the protection. And for websites you want to stay logged in, it’s opt-in.

At least they are using the internet archive, which is neat

Uh… I use librewolf that force a chrome + windows user agent and its totally fine?

Oh no. This is so bad. Who in their right mind would assume that a login user remains the same user throughout the session!?

Oh wait. Windows.

Writing prompt right here

I hate AI, but here it’s a bit understandable why copilot says that. If you ask the same thing to someone else they would surely respond 2 as they my imply you are trying to spell the word, and struggle on whether it’s one or two R on the last part.

I know it’s a common thing to ask in french when we struggle to spell our overly complicated language, so it doesn’t shock me

tea_bag.unwrap()

Beep

Why are they even in war against porn?

/j lust is just the second layer, try doing something about worse stuff like greed or gluttony

Delete container, rebuild container. Sometimes it’s just useful to clean up all the mess of cache files

I even thought about a crowd strike version of #303 today too

? I’m agreeing with you?

There’s a difference between helping people with misunderstanding a tool and belittling them for being wrong. It’s just a matter of wording that separate an helpful answer from a toxic one

I could tell you “You should actually use Y instead of X. They are numerous benefits like A, B and C. The doc actually have a great example you may have missed or not understood it was for this purpose. It will help you a lot more than what you are thinking of doing.” And this would be fine.

But “Just use Y. X is bad because Y is made for that. You not willing to use Y shouldn’t make you do X. There’s even a the first Google link on how to do it” isn’t fine.

And I have not belittled them at all. I have said that it wasn’t what I was looking for. A lot of times people post questions they think should solve their issue, but only to realise that they didn’t fully understand the full picture and theirs problem is on a larger scale.

Seems like the best solution. I’ll look into it

But can it prevent killing only docker, and not the build/big containers processes?

Oh that’s not a problem to let a container get killed. It’s perfectly fine. What I want is just not crippling my whole server because one container did a funny.

If it keeps docker and the portainer VM I’ll be 100% ok, because I can just restart it. I don’t want to have remote access to my server outside of my home for security reasons, so this is just the bare minimum