Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
From: <tomas@tuxteam.de>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2023 16:36:33 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] ZHyhcci4BAS3GoSJ@tuxteam.de>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] ZHyg3PzZFd7O82Ol@wooledge.org>
References: <[🔎] 5ae291f0-e952-e6b5-fbf5-e0cf95c71146@busby.net> <[🔎] CAJmb-YkxENiQ1QUGE9voi3ZVzLC9WRPipzv_EksOwRYjfYOq+A@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 647B188D.2030300@fastmail.fm> <[🔎] u5f7j2$lvr$1@ciao.gmane.io> <[🔎] 647B25FC.4060003@fastmail.fm> <[🔎] u5hb57$14vi$1@ciao.gmane.io> <[🔎] 58a49bff-eb0b-a4e3-6904-f194358ef03f@busby.net> <[🔎] 3119d528-38da-b39b-b021-5567efe65446@kalinowski.com.br> <ZHygFrcCe/1MjBBC@tuxteam.de> <[🔎] ZHyg3PzZFd7O82Ol@wooledge.org>

On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 10:34:04AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 04:30:46PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > So the practice is that the whole internet dumps the whole framework
> > schtack [2] on you.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebAssembly

We need better craftspeople, not better tools.

And no, I'm not actually blaming the people themselves, but an
environment which doesn't encourage that.

Cheers
-- 
t

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to:

References:
- Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?
  - From: Bret Busby <bret@busby.net>
- Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?
  - From: Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com>
- Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Bret Busby <bret@busby.net>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Eduardo M KALINOWSKI <eduardo@kalinowski.com.br>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: <tomas@tuxteam.de>
- Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
  - From: Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Next by Date: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Previous by thread: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Next by thread: Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread