chezmoi.io is one of the best dotfile managers available. Great template language if you need different, many ways to distribute secrets safely, merging works well even with templates, not limited to homedir.

I absolutely dislike the hate for systemd. Especially if there’s bullshit claims like

having both sets of tools installed can increase the attack surface.

in there.

larger attack surface compared to runit, openrc, or sysVinit.

Because they don’t execute million lines super thoroughly checked shell code or why exactly? Without any explanation total FUD.

Some independent binaries from the systemd project, e.g. systemd nspawn, can even used on OpenRC and the systemd project explicitly didn’t change the way to launch udev in debug mode because the Gentoo non-systemd udev pkg maintainer asked to not do so (nicely).

You should instead tell people why OpenRC/runit is (more) awesome in your opinion and maintain initscripts for them. Maybe you can volunteer at the Debian project and get them to adopt OpenRC aside systemd instead of only removing the remnants of sysVinit support. This would also be beneficial for pragmatic pro-systemd users that have to deal with docker or chroot environments.

Thx a lot for checking this, you gave me the missing part in the puzzle.

It was hard to find the actual patch increase, but the latest commit lists the current patch level:

+      - New microcodes:
+      + Family=0x17 Model=0x31 Stepping=0x00: Patch=0x0830107a Length=3200 bytes   <--- Your processor, higher patch version
+      + Family=0x17 Model=0xa0 Stepping=0x00: Patch=0x08a00008 Length=3200 bytes
+    - Updated microcodes:
+      + Family=0x17 Model=0x08 Stepping=0x02: Patch=0x0800820d Length=3200 bytes
+      + Family=0x17 Model=0x01 Stepping=0x02: Patch=0x0800126e Length=3200 bytes
+    - CVE-2023-20593

I guess that pretty much confirms the theory, AMD only rolls microcode for Epyc and there is no magic sauce why the patch version are all over the place on their consumer chips. For me, the worst thing is their lack of transparency. Guess they’re justification is ridiculous and incomprehensible from a customer standpoint, otherwise they would have communicated it.

Also funny that Ubuntu 22.04 doesn’t ship microcode for Zen3 and higher, why don’t they backport such things?

Anyone having hardware access to an epic CPU ? Could you please report the numbers from zstdcat /lib/firmware/amd-ucode/README.zst vs the patch level reported by grep microcode /proc/cpuinfo, even if you run a different distro ?

Eugen isn’t the Fediverse. At least for the Twitter Exodus most Masto instances used a fork that allowed for longer posts than Eugen liked. There’s 0 reason to care about what he’s doing, he can’t control the network.

And you still couldn’t be sure, could be parsed the other way around for historic reasons.
Just reading the source code (if possible ofc) is imho easier than reading.

You still don’t know which location is preffered and how get they get merged. In my experience, digging into the source is the most straighforward. But my usual problem is more that the config option doesn’t do at all what the documentation says it does.

The *nix equivalent is the lsof command. This doesn’t help you finding out in which hierarchy config files are parsed when the program accesses multiple ones, which is often the case.

What’s imho worse is how often config options or command flags don’t actually do at all what’s described in the manpage. I then have to dig into the source code once again and since you have to read through the whole behaviour it takes much longer than just looking up where the program tries to read config files.

Please - if you find such wrong docs in Open source software, submit a fix to the doc. It’s as important as normal bugfixes.