Sure, but even in those “few cases” Testing will get them soon.
I did read at some point that Testing may receive security updates later than stable, might be in those cases in which backports come straight from unstable.
Sure, but even in those “few cases” Testing will get them soon.
I did read at some point that Testing may receive security updates later than stable, might be in those cases in which backports come straight from unstable.
I don’t recommend going for (Debian’s/Devuan’s) testing (branch) as it targets a peculiar niche that I fail to understand; e.g. it doesn’t receive the security backports like Stable does nor does it receive them as soon as Unstable/Sid does. Unstable/Sid could work, but I would definitely setup (GRUB-)Btrfs + Timeshift/Snapper to retain my sanity.
From https://backports.debian.org/ :
Backports are packages taken from the next Debian release (called “testing”), adjusted and recompiled for usage on Debian stable
So by definition, security backports in stable are present in Testing in the form of regular packages, right?
I remember having some issue like that, but I’m not sure if this was the fix.
Try unchecking “Show desktop notifications when the song changes” on Spotify’s settings (right now it’s under the Display section).
Makes sense, thanks.
New to Linux: in which case would you stick with an “old-old-stable” release?
Software incompatibility?
I don’t have much experience using srcset but since you are still waiting for an answer… I’ll point you to what is stated in MDN’s docs.
According to that, you use a “media condition” when the image is displayed in different sizes. Their example
And you use 1x, 2x, etc (like your examples) when the image will occupy the same physical size.
May be a coincidence, but it stopped launching for me too. Worked Monday and Tuesday, yesterday I didn’t try to play, today it didn’t work.
Tried:
I don’t know if we’re discussing semantics. A performance score is attributed, and before the fix their scores were all 166. It doesn’t work, as you said. So the consequence is the preferred core being “random”, isn’t it?
Apparently there’s a bug in an AMD’s driver. It was supposed to assign processes based on each core’s self reported performance, but because of the bug it was random.
This “self reported performance” is based on evaluation done to the cores in the fab process, by AMD. Meaning, due to imperfections some cores are a bit better than others.
Ok, I understand what you meant, thanks.
Yeah, I wouldn’t run it in a production environment.