• 10 Posts
  • 1.11K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle







  • There are about a million different flavors of how to download and execute a shell script. Regardless, you need to redirect the output of curl into bash with the -s flag. Bash needs to know that it is reading from STDIN.

    Here is an over-thought stackoverflow page on it: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5735666/execute-bash-script-from-url

    Also, if the script is not being read properly, that might explain the dpkg lock issue. Running two instances of dpkg simultaneously is likely causing that collision you are seeing. (If one instance is running, it will touch a lock file and then delete it when it stops. It prevents “bad things” from happening when two instances of the same app want the same resources.)

    That is odd if your path is broken. It curl should be in /usr/bin and ‘which’ should find it. Are you somehow launching another shell inside a shell? Like zsh inside of bash, or something in that flavor? (In some rare cases, that would break paths and profile configs for your active shell.)

    Regardless of why curl isn’t being found, or only partially found, or something, learn “env”. You need to get a decent picture of what your working environment is and why something as basic as curl “isn’t found”. (‘which’ is about as a baseline of a command as there is.)



  • Fake or outdated info, actually. While this is a small tangent, I make it a habit to review basic, introductory information on a regular basis. (For example, I’ll still watch the occasional 3D printer 101 guide even though I could probably build one from scratch while blindfolded.)

    I have been in IT for a very long time and have branched out into other engineering fields over the years. What I have found, unsurprisingly, is that methods and theories can get outdated quick. So, regularly reviewing things I consider “engineering gospel” is just healthy practice.

    For the topic at hand, it doesn’t take much misinformation (or outdated information) to morph into something absolutely fake, or at best, completely wrong. It takes work to separate fact from fiction and many people are too lazy to look past internet pictures with words, or 15 second video clips. (It’s also hard to break out of believing unverified information “just because that’s the way is”.)




  • I suppose you are correct. If the bit isn’t structural, it doesn’t need to pass any test for microcracks. If it is structural and it passes testing, YOLO that shit.

    It’s just the core frames that need serious attention though. I don’t think I have been around a single aircraft that wasn’t constantly bleeding some kind of fluid, so everything else not related to getting the thing in the air and keeping it from completely disintegrating while in flight is mostly optional. (I am joking, but not really. Airplanes hold the weird dichotomy of being strangely robust and extremely fragile at the same time.)


  • And there are significant technology differences. The new upgrade will be the B-52J or K.

    Proper aircraft maintenance cycles are intense, so it would surprise me if any of airframes we use now have 1952 original parts. Aircraft are subject to lots of vibration and the aluminum in B-52s will eventually stress-crack because of it. (It wouldn’t surprise me if composites were added in many places instead of aluminum replacements, but that is just speculation.)

    Also during those maintenance cycles, it’s much easier to do systems upgrades since the aircraft is basically torn down to its frame anyway.

    It’s the same design to what we had in 1952, but they ain’t the same aircraft, philosophically speaking.