Comments for dominykas.com

Comment on (Solved) troubles with Ubuntu, VirtualBox, OpenVZ/Proxmox and MySQL by Abdoulaye Siby

Abdoulaye Siby — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:58:42 +0000

Interesting. I thought I was the first one to have this idea. To good this is that at least I know now that what I was doing is not that crazy at all. I also have Windows 7 and Proxmox running on VirtualBox. It works flawlessly and take far less resources when using ONLY OpenVZ containers.

I have an annoyance that I am experiencing though … My home network is using 192.168.2.x … and Proxmox is using 192.168.2.15 (static IP configured inside Proxmox)

Unfortunately, as soon as I am on another network, the IP 192.168.2.15 will be unavailable. Maybe it’s just a matter of create an alias for the interface and use that IP instead of the one that matches the current network.

Cheers.

Comment on javascript:void(0) must die by stephband

stephband — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 18:41:54 +0000

Right on. We use a tags with href=”#action_name” at webdoc.com – and that’s because I have been bitten by button style before. I haven’t tested them in a year, but back when I did FireFox was the culprit – it was impossible to remove overflow: hidden, among other things, I seem to remember.

Anyway, at some point I’m going to move our buttons to being command tags, the new html5 element for application commands. In the spec, it appears you can replace li tags in a ul or menu with command tags, which is pretty groovy.

Comment on (Solved) troubles with Ubuntu, VirtualBox, OpenVZ/Proxmox and MySQL by David Sugar

David Sugar — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 21:05:39 +0000

The strange thing is your weird setup actually makes perfect sense to me, at least for setting up testing appliances. I was thinking of doing a sipwitch testing appliance and a backup/test site for my main public site, which uses mediawiki, and maybe something for something else. None of these really require a full vm by themselves (which seems a huge waste of resources), I did not wish to mix them together in testing, nor did I wish to dedicate a box just for things that have rather transient use. Disk space and memory I do have plenty of on my main dev box, I too have become rather familiar with virtualbox, and I also like it’s small footprint and simplicity.

It’s possible with the newer kernel in proxmox 1.6 (it now uses 2.6.32) will remap /dev/sda correctly from first boot, though I think I may try the virtualbox sata if it has better performance.

Comment on javascript:void(0) must die by Dominykas

Dominykas — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:19:22 +0000

Mark, even if you hadn’t provided real URLs from the start, you can always link to named anchors, i.e. #something – as long as #something exists (even a div with an id will do) – it’s better than void. Forgot to include that in the post :)

I did, indeed, not elaborate on the whole GET/POST topic – but hey – it’s for future use :) Especially if I get a chance to publish the security slides.

As for redirecting to a new form – the same URL can handle both AJAX, and non-AJAX (/myResource?delete=yes&confirmed=yes). Assuming you’re already doing a POST, you just need to check for AJAX header and return appropriate view – be it MVC or not – if (AJAX) { echo JSON() } else { echo HTML() } – not that much code required!

The only real thing to build is the “interstitial form” – but that can easily be frameworkified. In reality, supporting this is not even 10% overhead on individual feature, compared to the hoops that you have to implement for it to work (access checking, validation, escaping, connections, etc etc). And it’s even more negligible in the big picture of the overall project (whatever the case may be) – you need frameworks developed, etc etc.

There’s no reason to be lazy, whether client pays for it or not. If one starts doing that now, and charging their customers 5% more, without even negotiating the “accessibility” aspect – the “just do it” way – it’s still just just more than inflation in Ireland in 2008. And you get the bragging rights as well, even if the customer doesn’t realize that :)

Comment on javascript:void(0) must die by Mark Lennox

Mark Lennox — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:39:09 +0000

Using real URL’s is great as long as you have built that into your design from the start. You should probably mention that using GET’s to update/delete is probably not a good thing – which people might implement while taking a short-cut.

Redirecting to a new form from the link to support regressive dehancement ;) is my favourite choice, also links are crawlable, URL’s don’t need to be maintained in server-side AND javascript etc. – but it means more coding, and the client won’t pay for that (time, not necessarily money). But that opens up the whole question of selling basic functionality to the business, which is always a hard sell – “gimme what I want, not what I need”