Notices by Xerz 💗 [UNMOVED] (espectalll@mstdn.io), page 53

@kurisu But why so? Are you working on a server?

@SarcasmKid just read it, it's belove the sauce, you should probably clean the screen

@quad > WINE

@calvin The latest version is E22. And I definitely will have to take a look myself because no one on the thread seems to give relevant information for current versions.

@daniel5555 I know what happened, blaming PGP is nonsense and this was already known since 2001

@daniel5555 I don't see what's unsafe about PGP tbh

@cereal @harmlessgryphon You can't easily get a disposable phone number everywhere, it's a lot more centralized than e-mail

Update on that Enlightenment thing: I have not much evidence about how good/bad E17+ is, so I can only go ahead and try it on my own. Give me good luck.

@vurpo That's a big difference if you ask me, because that "security" detail implies a lot of stuff both internally and when doing stuff

@calvin "Let me talk about the next version of EFL, which my corporation doesn’t use yet. This version might be publicly available or not. Hopefully not, because all developers died, but I don’t think mankind is that lucky."

I guess this means E17 is "the next version"

@calvin Exactly, but not delivered as stable... and I seriously doubt some certain corporation would decide to make their software on top of such an important library if it were unstable

@calvin actually, E16 was (and is) the last version of "classic" Enlightenment, E17 was released in December 2012: https://www.iotgadgets.com/2013/02/enlightenment-0-17-release/

This post is from 2015 so who knows.

@calvin actually, E16 was (and is) the last version of "classic" Enlightenment, which was released in December 2012: https://www.iotgadgets.com/2013/02/enlightenment-0-17-release/

This post is from 2015 so who knows.

@calvin where does it say so?

@calvin Update: seems like this is related to an old EFL version? It apparently got fully rewritten from E17+

@dthompson I've never considered a chroot as a "container" tbh

@dthompson That's correct, but I don't see why would you try to use a container for executing applications otherwise.