You may be interested in OpenBSD's pledge[1][2][3].

> Why trust a program to set its own capabilities?

An example may be that a program starts needing a wide range of capabilties but can then ratchet down to a reduced set once running, aka "privdrop".

> why isn't there a way to set capabilities from the parent process when execing?

There have been replies on other systems so just to stick with pledge which provides the abiliy to set "execpromises" to do this.

[1] https://man.openbsd.org/pledge

[2] https://www.openbsd.org/papers/eurobsdcon2017-pledge.pdf

[3] https://www.openbsd.org/papers/BeckPledgeUnveilBSDCan2018.pd...

I think you're talking about "execpromises"?[1] I'll have to study it a bit.

[1] https://bsdb0y.github.io/posts/openbsd-intro-to-update-on-pl...

> Before rebasing, push your current work to your remote fork. This gives you a backup you can recover from if anything goes wrong

I don't follow this. Just abort the rebase?

Previous discussion https://qht.co/item?id=45809193

The latest Oxide and Friends podcast episode is - as one may expect - a great pairing if you enjoyed reading this.

https://youtu.be/3z_TQxe9jx4

I think this should be merged into/marked a dupe of https://qht.co/item?id=41662596

Don't parse the output of ls, use globbing or find. Here are some examples https://mywiki.wooledge.org/ParsingLs

The problem is existing shell scripts not written by yourself.

This is why I encourage not overriding common commands in $PATH. Setup an alias instead so it only applies to interactive shells (or just type the new command :p).

Shell scripting is already fickle enough with compatibility issues across the major implemtations of POSIX utils (GNU, macOS/ BSD, Busybox). Even /bin/sh itself cannot be relied upon to behave consistently across platforms. Notably, Busybox's ash supports the non-POSIX substring syntax that Bash does. This won't work on distro's like Debian where /bin/sh is linked to dash shell.

Title truncated to fit within character limit.

Previous discussion https://qht.co/item?id=23529954

Just to emphasize part of your comment as I think a lot a people aren't fully aware - Vim has an undo tree https://vimhelp.org/usr_32.txt.html#usr_32.txt

Dupe of https://qht.co/item?id=38578247

Not exactly. The linked post is from theregister announcing the fork. This post is the fork itself.