Thanks

Alright thanks

I see. Thanks

I thought they were using the USB protocol. Thanks

Oh. I thought they were using USB. Thanks

PCIe to USB and back to PCIe like what the miners use? Isn’t that unreliable long-term?

I cannot see any decent PCIE X1 to X16 risers on amazon. Everything is USB based which I don’t want

There’s another situation. There are older (and cheaper cards) which are PCIe gen 2 x8. Unfortunately, pcie gen 2 x1 is not going to suffice. What would I have to do to get this older kind of card to work? Do you have any reliable PCIe x1 to x16 risers in mind?

It doesn’t need that kind of bandwidth. 6 gigabit ports cannot saturate pcie gen 3 x1 in terms of bandwidth anyway.

What do I do if the card is PCIe gen 2 x8 though?

I’ll likely go for a 4 or 6 gigabit port card, so PCIe gen 3 x1 is not a problem. Am I correct in understanding that the card will run at PCIe gen 3 X1 if I do this?

What can I do if the card is PCIe gen 2 x8? These cards from Silicom are really cheap on ebay

Technically the slot is PCIe Gen 4 x1, but I understand. TBH PCIe gen 3 X1 is fine too, that’s more than 6 port Gigabit cards can saturate anyway.

Even maxing out the ports won’t be a problem. Even 6 gigabit ports don’t saturate a PCIe Gen 3 X1 slot in terms of bandwidth. But will the card work at all if all the physical pins are not connected electrically to the slot?

The slot is open. I’m just wondering whether the card will work properly in that slot since all the pins won’t be attached. PCIe Gen 3 X1 bandwidth is more than enough for it

I don’t want to cut the card

The card only needs PCIE Gen 3 X2 == PCIE Gen 4 X1 in terms of bandwidth. I was hoping to fit it into the slot since it meets the bandwidth requirements

How would I do it then? The card doesn’t exactly need PCIE gen 3 X4, at the most it needs PCIE Gen 3 X2 == PCIE Gen 4 X1 in terms of bandwidth.

Use the image viewer used by TAILS

I don’t mind if people use LGPL or some derivative of GPL. All I want is improvements to the source be published, and MIT simply doesn’t enforce that. I have no intention to force companies to publish their code that they have worked on for a long time - doing that never really helps. But I do want them to publish changes they make to already FOSS products so the author and the community can benefit.

Thank you for your work. If people like you were all around us, then I wouldn’t mind as much projects using MIT since we would still see contributions. But I doubt there’s that many people out there like you. Thank you for contributing to FOSS.

MAC is generally more complex than simple Unix permissions. Whether SELinux is more complex than AppArmour is more up to preference in my opinion