|
Gnome-disks, just because it's there on my primary laptop (Ubuntu 16.04LTS). It's a bit of a swiss army knife for disks.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Windows user sadly 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Been thinking about that, but I never seem to be able to assemble the courage to actually do it, can't be a jack of all trades n'est ce pas 
|
|
|
|
|
As an alternative, you can run Ubuntu (and I'm sure many other distros) from a USB stick. Leaves no trace when you're done. (Just don't select "Install"  )
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I use Lan_SpeedTest for such testing. Rudimentary, but works on windows.
Helps me to validate my USB3 is working or not (sad to say major driver/chipset issues after swapping hard-drives into a cold spare that was NOT identical).
Totusoft
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have used HD Tune both for disk checking and performance info
HD Tune [^]
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, I will add it to the list on Slant !
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, the other manufactures are marketing the 'Big name brand 32GB' as V90. 
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think the benchmarks on your computer apply to using the cards in the camera? Wouldn’t put it past some camera manufacturers to optimize their camera for their own SD cards.
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK the camera manufacturer does not supply branded SD cards. Although I wouldn't expect the numbers to be exactly the same, I am pretty sure the general ranking would be similar in different devices.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I have never seen Canon / Nikon / Sony made SD Card.
|
|
|
|
|
Now you have done all this work but we cannot benefit from it as we don't know the makes
Noname is easy though 
|
|
|
|
|
Obfuscating the brand names is deliberate. My original message was intended as a general comment on the SD card scene, and I don't want to get drawn into potentially nasty and pointless legalistic or marketing debate. In retrospect, I should probably have added "YMMV", although I would expect most CP members to understand that implicitly.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Something went wrong and the new SDK 2.1.401 references a version of the Microsoft.NETCore.App that is on a MyGet feed and should not be in a release. This results in programs that compiled before the upgrade to fail.
You can 'fix' this with a global.json file which pins the SDK to 2.1.400 (the previous SDK version) or by uninstalling the new SDK.
I've made MS aware of the issue, and they are scrambling to rectify the problem, which should not have happened and they admit they screwed up somewhere in the release process.
The Issue on GitHub invalid Microsoft.NETCore.App after upgrade to SDK 2.1.401 · Issue #3474 · aspnet/Home · GitHub[^]
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Dennis wrote: happened and they admit they screwed up somewhere in the release process.
I would not bet they do it publicly 
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
but they did.
natemcmaster commented 12 minutes ago
It appears Visual Studio bundled the wrong build of the CLI. @livarcocc's team is working with the VS team to investigate fixes. I'm going to close this as a duplicate of dotnet/cli#9897.
The recommended workaround is to uninstall 2.1.401, download the correct 2.1.401 installers from https://www.microsoft.com/net/download/dotnet-core/2.1, and install those instead.
This appears to fix it, but you may have to do a
dotnet restore -f at the root dir of the solution.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Dennis wrote: but they did.
Nope... A MS worker did it. It is nto the same 
Matthew Dennis wrote: This appears to fix it, but you may have to do a
dotnet restore -f at the root dir of the solution.
But that only if you have previously installed the buggy version, or always?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: I would not bet they do it publicly
Do you announce your bugs publicly?
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
That's exactly why I said that... strange enough... the dev did it.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I had a bug with 15.8.1 and they rushed out a fix that repaired the problem there.
With that one, the resource file plug-in wouldn't load so I couldn't edit resource files.
|
|
|
|
|
In 15.8.1 they also broke support for the Italian keyboard layout (fixed in 15.8.2): you couldn't type closing curly braces for the entire month of August I guess it's a good thing it happened in the month during which most of Italy is on vacation!
Luca
The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance. -- Wing Commander IV
En Það Besta Sem Guð Hefur Skapað, Er Nýr Dagur.
(But the best thing God has created, is a New Day.)
-- Sigur Ròs - Viðrar vel til loftárása
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, the advantage of not having any .NET SDK installed at all.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
