it didnt work sadly. all i got was a blank screen
edit: actually i think i got it right this time, i just needed to format it as an empty partition on gparted. brb edit 2: nope. blank screen again (even though the dd’d partition got recognized by gparted this time)
maybe just making a new folder on the USB’s root and putting stuff in there would suffice? i typically dd the iso to the usb drive, so thats sadly not possible
wrt ventoy, ive been avoiding it given some security concerns that were raised a while ago: https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/issues/2795
i thought about doing that, but i wasnt sure if that would get recognized as a bootable device (especially on my pc which is still has a bios instead of uefi). ill test it and come back to say if it worked or not
Not all 32-bit systems are i386
but the debian i386 architecture means all 32 bit x86 processors. there’s no “i686” build of debian
there are no i586 or i686 kernel or iso available, you can look for them. i386 packages only exist for compatibility reasons, so you can run 32 bit applications on amd64 machines. please read the release notes
https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/issues.html#reduced-support-for-i386
From trixie, i386 is no longer supported as a regular architecture: there is no official kernel and no Debian installer for i386 systems
[…]
Users running i386 systems should not upgrade to trixie. Instead, Debian recommends either reinstalling them as amd64, where possible, or retiring the hardware.
i wouldn’t recommend debian since they’ve dropped 32 bit support in trixie, their latest release. the previous release, bookworm, still supports 32 bits archs, but it eol’s less than a year from now
yeah, unfortunately most people in the foss community are the apolitical/free thinker types who hate the fsf bc it is “too political/evangelist” and don’t want to understand how user freedom is affected by permissive licenses
it’s interesting how the move away from the gpl is never explicitly justified as a license issue: instead, people always have some plausible technical motivation. with clang/llvm it was the lower compile times and better error messages; with these coreutils it’s “rust therefore safer”. the license change was never even addressed
i believe they have to do this exactly bc permissive licenses appeal to libertarian/apolitical types who see themselves as purely rational and changing a piece of software bc of the license would sound too… ideological…
so the people in charge of these changes always have a plausible technical explanation at hand to mask away the political aspect of the change
it’s been a trend for a while unfortunately. getting rid of the gpl is the motivation behind e.g. companies sponsoring clang/llvm so hard right now. there are also the developers that think permissive licenses are “freer” bc freedom is doing whatever you want /s. they’re ideologically motivated to ditch the gpl so they’ll support the change even if there’s no benefit for them, financial or otherwise.
it’s not just that this is not for me. i genuinely don’t see the point of a terminal-only editor (even vim has a gui version) without any extensibility. the reason vim and emacs are still being used despite being old and full of cruft is that their extensibility makes them very adaptable. treesitter et al seem enough now, but what about ten years from now?
it’s also weird their motivation for being terminal-only is better performance, as if guis are this super resource intensive thing and not something that’s been mainstream for at least 30 years
for the terminal
no thank you
there is currently no plugin system available
lmao
from the comments, there’s a split between
i wish this split was made more explicit, because more often than not someone comes looking for recommendations for linux as a tool, but someone else responds expecting they want linux as a toy. then the person will try out linux and will leave because it’s not what they want, not knowing that there is a kind of linux that is what they want
no you wont