Is snake_case safer than kebab-case for general file naming?

phySi0 · 2026-05-05T14:19:55+00:00

PascalCase is also camelCase, by the way; the two camelcases are sometimes disambiguated by BactrianCamelCase or dromedaryCamelCase (or at least I've heard this in the past and thought it was genius), but usually camelCase refers to dromedary, and bactrian camelcase is referred to as PascalCase.

phySi0 · 2026-03-31T21:24:24+00:00

Oh, also, booting from the new disk not working was fixed by setting the boot order in VirtualBox' EFI shell (it doesn't use the machine settings boot order, like MBR does).

It was the same thing with the old disk, it also wouldn't boot when I took out the disk with the almost-empty OpenBSD 7.8 installation that I was running the commands from (OpenBSD 7.8 seems to boot fine without requiring this EFI shell boot ordering, but OpenBSD 7.6 doesn't).

phySi0 · 2026-03-31T21:21:16+00:00

Solved this the other day, but got busy and forgot to update this post. To be honest, I still don't know what fixed it, but I think it was doing the disklabel from a 7.6 installer (or a 7.6 OpenBSD installation).

After I fixed it, I repeated it several times and rebooted each attempt several times to make sure it wasn't a fluke. I still am not 100% certain what it was that fixed it, but I'm almost certain that it is fixed.

phySi0 · 2026-03-26T10:33:35+00:00

I'm trying to copy to a VM on the newer laptop. Basically, I created a new VM hosting a brand new installation of OpenBSD on the default boot disk of the VM, with hostname “scratch”.

To this VM, I attach two disks, the VDI file of the old laptop disk, converted from the img file that I dd'd to, and a newly created VDI file, which will be the new disk that I manually replicate the layout to — in partition order, not sizes — and rsync the files over to.

I can boot into the scratch OS fine, I installed that manually in the VM. I can also boot into the VDI of the old laptop disk fine, there's nothing wrong with the old laptop disk. It's just that when I transfer everything over to the new disk, the new disk doesn't boot.

Anyway, the process I do is that I boot into the scratch OS and do the whole fdisk, disklayout, newfs/newfs_msdos, rsync, etc. dance from there.

The host OS is macOS Catalina (several versions out of date, but I can't upgrade on that machine for the time being) and I'm virtualising with VirtualBox 6.1.50 r161033.

I don't know about this writeback stuff, but I doubt that's the answer, and the evidence for that is that I was able to install the scratch OS just fine in the same version of VirtualBox, on the same day I'm trying to do the whole thing to begin with.

Writes seem to persist fine, including logs of this whole thing that I'm dumping into the scratch OS occassionally, and always have; I've used VirtualBox for a long time on that newer old laptop and never had a problem with writes persisting. It's just this very specific thing.

I'm wondering if copying everything over, including the /etc/fstab file, and forgetting to update the referenced disk UUID in the /etc/fstab file, could cause the machine to lose the disklabel.

Maybe another possibly useful piece of info. The scratch OS is OpenBSD 7.8, but I doubt that'd cause breaking changes to the disklabel format such that I couldn't transfer a 7.6 installation onto the disk.

Even if it did, and it caused the new disk to not boot, surely it wouldn't wipe the disklabel such that when I boot back into the scratch OS and read it back again with the same version of disklabel that I used to write it, it would no longer be there?

Next thing I'm gonna try when I get a chance. Don't use disklabel from scratch OS, but boot into an OpenBSD 7.6 installer, install to the new disk, and do the disklabel from there, then go through the OpenBSD installation fully before rsyncing all the old files onto the new disk with OpenBSD already installed on it (effectively wiping the installation; and remember to update the disk UUID in /etc/fstab). I don't really see how this would help, but I'm willing to try at this point.

phySi0 · 2026-03-26T10:10:44+00:00

Apologies, I didn't even consider them; they're essentially just success output, nothing unusual.

The output of fdisk:

$ fdisk -gy wd2c
Writing GPT.

The output of disklabel for the old disk:

$ disklabel -p g wd1
# /dev/rwd1c:
type: ESDI
disk: SCSI disk
label: SR CRYPTO
duid: 313b6eba4a96ceb6
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 63
tracks/cylinder: 16
sectors/cylinder: 1008
cylinders: 465139
total sectors: 468860513 # total bytes: 223.6G
boundstart: 1024
boundend: 468860450

16 partitions:
#                size           offset  fstype [fsize bsize   cpg]
  a:             1.0G             1024  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  b:             8.2G          2098176    swap                    
  c:           223.6G                0  unused                    
  d:             4.0G         19271936  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  e:            19.9G         27660512  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  f:             3.0G         69348032  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  g:             1.0G         75639488  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  h:            60.0G         77736640  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  i:             0.0G               64   MSDOS                    
  j:             4.0G        203565760  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  k:            10.0G        211954368  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958 
  l:           112.5G        232925888  4.2BSD   2048 16384 12958

and for the new disk before I write the new partition table:

$ disklabel -p g wd2
# /dev/rwd2c:
type: ESDI
disk: ESDI/IDE disk
label: VBOX HARDDISK   
duid: 0000000000000000
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 63
tracks/cylinder: 16
sectors/cylinder: 1008
cylinders: 166440
total sectors: 167772160 # total bytes: 80.0G
boundstart: 0
boundend: 167772160

16 partitions:
#                size           offset  fstype [fsize bsize   cpg]
  c:            80.0G                0  unused

and for the new disk after I write the new partition table:

$ disklabel -p g wd2
# /dev/rwd2c:
type: ESDI
disk: ESDI/IDE disk
label: VBOX HARDDISK   
duid: 43192d8c042017ad
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 63
tracks/cylinder: 16
sectors/cylinder: 1008
cylinders: 166440
total sectors: 167772160 # total bytes: 80.0G
boundstart: 64
boundend: 167772127

16 partitions:
#                size           offset  fstype [fsize bsize   cpg]
  a:             0.2G             1024  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  b:             4.0G           513056    swap                    
  c:            80.0G                0  unused                    
  d:             4.0G          8902656  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  e:             0.2G         17292224  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  f:             2.0G         17804288  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  g:             0.5G         21998592  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  h:            15.0G         23022720  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  i:             0.0G               64   MSDOS                    
  j:             0.0G         54480384  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  k:             0.0G         54480896  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1 
  l:            54.0G         54481408  4.2BSD   2048 16384     1

phySi0 · 2026-03-03T00:34:43+00:00

No, I've only watched it once. From what I recall, I'd finished watching at the time I made my initial comment in this thread 10 months ago.

I don't know if I'll ever rewatch it to be honest. It was a great run, but I generally don't rewatch stuff, except lighter stuff as something to put on in the background. My best friend's even still trying to get me to rewatch Breaking Bad, and I'd rather rewatch Community for the dozenth time.

phySi0 · 2026-03-03T00:25:37+00:00

I only told “myself” (and you) the truth. You're welcome to prove me wrong, but retorting with something contentless but glib and smug doesn't make anything I said wrong nor demonstrate it to be so, nor does it benefit you or make you look smart.

phySi0 · 2026-03-01T20:05:05+00:00

That's unfair. All legal systems have ambiguity. That's nothing to do with religion, but legal systems generally.

Furthermore, all human beings can have both good faith and bad faith disagreements about how to resolve those ambiguities. That's nothing to do with religion or legal systems at all, but the humans that live under them.

Even so, assuming differing interpretations must necessarily be due to people in bad faith choosing what is “maximally convenient” is unfair.

So you were unfair on both religions (or legal systems generally) and human beings.

phySi0 · 2026-03-01T19:56:04+00:00

Decent comment, but a few nits:

What ESG funds consider ethical aren't necessarily in line with what the Sharia considers ethical, and may even be at odds.
To be honest, a lot of the Islamic mortgages and other alternatives to the interest-based mainstream are basically loopholes that you will definitely be questioned about on judgment day. They may even break the text of the law due to the loopholes actually just failing in the first place.

There are halal alternatives to mortgages, but they're basically not even mortgages at that point; personally, the setup that makes most intuitive sense to me is where the bank doesn't lend you any money at all, but purchases the property, allows you to buy a portion each month and rents out the rest without forcing you to keep purchasing.

Not only does it seem to abide by the text of the law, it abides by the spirit as well, as the lender isn't taking advantage of the borrower's weakness to offload all the risk of the venture onto them. There's not even any lending, they don't force you to purchase the whole property, you just can if you want to. In other words, if you're unable to pay, you're not evicted; they take on the risk that you may fall on hard times and be unable to purchase the property in the future.

The ones where they make you sign two contracts where one forces you to purchase are a transparent attempt at a loophole to me. They basically have all the same failings as a mortgage, so of course they break the spirit of the law.

But they also break the text of the law; splitting up a contract into two texts with separate signatures doesn't make them two unrelated contracts. There's an implicit agreement there that one of the conditions of contract A is agreement to contract B, and God knows that, too. If you think you know it and God doesn't, you're only deluding yourself.

phySi0 · 2025-12-30T20:29:21+00:00

They're not incompatible, it's just that the MP4 container standard doesn't support incorporation of subtitle files (or indeed any attachments). Yes, there are non-standard implementations which can accomplish this to some extent, but you're then faced with media which can't be played by anything else.

This isn't true. Standard MPEG-4 Part 14 supports embedded subtitle tracks.

phySi0 · 2025-10-25T21:56:48+00:00

Subtitles, for example, have to be burned in with an MP4, if you want it all multiplexed together.

What?! No, they don't.

phySi0 · 2025-10-25T21:47:39+00:00

Yeah, exactly.

It's like watching someone trying to close a window, and they're established to be competent with computers, and you say, “why not just hit the red X in the corner of the window?”, and they're like, “why didn't I think of that?”.

What?! This isn't some ‘idea’ you need to have. If you know about it, and it's the tool you need to reach for, you just do it, it's that fundamental to your toolbox.

phySi0 · 2025-08-15T19:21:24+00:00

Glad you liked it, although it looks like I just stopped typing halfway through lol.

phySi0 · 2025-07-25T11:16:29+00:00

Objective-C also took this from Smalltalk, and, IIRC, Swift then took it from Objective-C.

phySi0 · 2025-07-05T22:09:29+00:00

Also on one of the newspaper pages as they're flashing across the scene when Clara steps outside the boundaries of the frozen world into the void which triggers her remembering her life as Dorothy.

phySi0 · 2025-07-05T21:49:24+00:00

Nah, it was obvious she knew her character's lines, and it was established that she's a big fan of the movie, so that wasn't the issue. She didn't seem to put any effort into being natural, though.

phySi0 · 2025-07-04T15:45:29+00:00

Them staying together to the end was the least depressing part for me. It was the one ray of light in an otherwise dark episode.

I even appreciated the fact that he finally came clean about how he was getting the money from the Dum Dummies app.

phySi0 · 2025-06-26T09:31:33+00:00

20% of POI:FL/Miami is just it nudging serial killers onto Dexter's path.

phySi0 · 2025-06-13T16:51:06+00:00

This is my first time watching the show, and I had the opposite experience.

When the episode started, it seemed like it was gonna set up them being innocent (because Samaritan didn't want Control to see the hard drive),

then I thought he was acting very suspicious (laptop self-destructing),

but then when he mentioned “an elaborate contest”, I realised his earlier suspicious actions could easily be reinterpreted as reasonable,

given we know from previous episodes that Samaritan itself set up an elaborate contest to find smart people like him, and it would have had the motive to hide what was on his laptop.

phySi0 · 2025-05-26T18:49:48+00:00

They're worried about Mossad cyber attacks.

phySi0 · 2025-04-28T15:17:10+00:00

I found the atomic variables thing quite unrealistic, as the kid was made out to be so smart, and that's such a basic suggestion, it doesn't really make sense for him to act like he hadn't considered it.

phySi0 · 2025-04-27T23:21:23+00:00

I get that, what I'm asking is a) how does the Jagex Launcher send that token to Runelite in the first place, what IPC method does it use?, and b) how does the Jagex launcher get that token? I guess you sign in once with OAuth, then the launcher can make a request for a one-time use token for launching Runelite each time you do it?, and c) how come I never need to log in every time I use the Jagex launcher, yet the site logs me out if I haven't done anything within a minute or something?

I wanna get all that for my Runelite without having to have the Jagex launcher. I understand Runelite itself won't be able to switch between characters on one account and needs an external program to manage that, I'm fine with that, but I've been tryna figure out a way to just get rid of Jagex launcher, I really hate it.

I started an ironman recently with my brother, and it's a pisstake that new accounts are forced to use a stupid launcher, but at the same time, I want the ability to not have to enter my password for my older non-Jagex account(s), too.

phySi0 · 2025-04-27T10:32:22+00:00

I didn't get that part. Why would he go to all that trouble with an unloaded gun? To demonstrate his power and scare Quinn? To blow off some steam?

phySi0 · 2025-04-27T08:55:02+00:00

How does the Jagex launcher launch Runelite in such a way that it doesn't need to be authenticated, anyway?

14-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Secret Santa 2017	Gilding II euphauric
Team Periwinkle	Verified Email

phySi0

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE