Looks nearly identical to Helvetica when I switch back and forth with inspector tool. Some letters are different and there’s some kerning changes but large parts look the same. at least to my untrained eye

You’re absolutely right. My rational brain agrees and chalks it up to poor project management. However… emotions run high when you have zero idea why something isn’t working and the process of elimination is pretty taxing. So the point for me is venting / maybe someone will read this and remember to write their node version down!

I’m curious, how do you measure the pulse of a project that old? Do people still talk about it? Or that not even necessary — use it until it breaks and otherwise don’t think about it?

Why do you want your building materials to have a pulse?

Ideally, in adopting dependencies, you should be looking for a mature utility whose design was clear and implementation is complete.

If it's open source, you should be able to read and unserstand the code yourself, and you should make an earnest effort to do so, in case it has faults you wouldn't usually allow in your own code and in case you need to fork it at some point.

This lets you you build well-designed, stable, maintainable, clear things yourself.

The alternate, building your project on a random collection of "living" projects undergoing active development is how you banish yourself to perpetual maintenance, build failures and CVE warnings that have nothing to do with your work, surprise regressions when you update your referenced version (you are, at least, pinning your versions??), etc

Something like a HTTP 1.1 client is something you might expect would be a pretty stable thing that doesn't need too many updates, right?

But I would not assume that a HTTP client that has been untouched in 12 years supports SNI, for example, which means that actually it might be totally useless for a lot of modern sites (certainly Android did not support SNI 12 years ago).

You're going to put it behind nginx anyways, right? So why does it even matter?

Client, not server.

If it has an issue tracker, you can look in there for things that look like real issues and are unaddressed.

If there's no issue tracker, you can YOLO and try it and see if it works, or you can look around at the code and see if it looks reasonable.

Even if there are unaddressed issues, you can always use it and fix it when it breaks. If it's reasonable enough, it's a good start anyway. And at least my assumption with open source is I'm going to be fixing it when it breaks, so lack of a pulse is better than churn.

Maybe "pulse" could be transitive? Like, if a project doesn't have many recent commits, but many projects using it have recent commits.

Hold on, you had to do binary surgery using an OpenSSL version from an old box you had? I salute the dedication.

Looks to me he just copied a shared library and changed the search path.

Also, if it was statically linked, he wouldn't have that one problem. (Could have others, but not that one.)

Not the OP but what sometimes works is as easy as:

``` ldd your-binary ``` on the old host and then copy all the thing that is referenced, put into ./foo and then start like so on new host: `LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./foo ./your-binary`. (may include typos, from memory)

A great tool for this used to be https://github.com/intoli/exodus - not sure if it still works.

Disclaimer: Also please don't do this with network-facing services, security applies, etc.pp. but it's a good trick to know.

I used it for something early this year, it was working then.

A sewing needle, a spare magnet, and a very steady hand.

I think you copy the library file and add it to you load path

patchelf

but don't forget to make sure your new path is fewer characters than the original one so you don't overwrite any of the library

Wow, that’s honestly impressive.

If there was an option to guarantee versions could exist for X amount of years (maybe even months?) then that would greatly help the stability of projects.

Let's see:

  * uses a mix of sources from different years
  * a lot of guesses eg. arbitrary calculation with international students and Jewish SAT scores
  * Uses Mean SAT Scores nationally, not from Ivies
  * "This guaranteed to not unfairly over- or under-count any demographic" lol
  * Commentary makes conclusions about entrance based solely on SAT scores despite that not being anywhere near the full picture of an application

Calling B.S.

Or you could see it as man + (something) -- i.e. better than man. It really depends on how you take a normal word and assign an agenda to it.

Ditto "man" and "he" being used when the sex of the person in question isn't known, or as a poetic stand-in for "human"—the usual complaint about that is that it implies maleness is "normal" at the expense of women but it could just as easily be seen as erasing what's distinctive about maleness, at its expense and in favor of women, who get their own dedicated words that aren't multi-purposed and also used to refer to men in some cases. Just a matter of perspective who's harmed by it (if you take anyone as being harmed).