dzwdz@fleshwing:/tmp/lobs$ diff -C 1 old.txt new.txt
*** old.txt     2024-09-05 19:35:57.949201336 +0200
--- new.txt     2024-09-05 19:35:51.805113042 +0200
***************
*** 161,173 ****
  15  This is reminding me of a quote:
- 13  >Then instead of testing all of that shit every time we built something from
- . 6  Gentoo had that a feature (search "portage feature confcache"). But as far
- . 5  > maybe it’s that people would rather write rants about autoconf than do an
- . 4  It used to be more common 25 years ago but once you got a wrong entry, it w
- 9  I don't think you can have a simple notation that declares what is supported
- 8  Is backdooring a software package a criminal act in <your, the committer's co
- . 8  IANAL, but in the US this is covered by [18 USC 1030 (b)](https://uscode.ho
- . . 1  Does this cover giving away code for free on the internet?  I suppose may
- . . . 9  According to this [comment on HN](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=
- . . . 2  I don't think you can unwillingly conspire. If someone hacks your compu
- . . . . 2  > I don’t think you can unwillingly conspire. If someone hacks your c
  14  > Why didn't we end up with a situation where it was just a standard thing t
--- 161,162 ----
***************
*** 197,198 ****
--- 186,198 ----
  . 1  I wonder what this tcc configure script magic is for…
+ 13  >Then instead of testing all of that shit every time we built something from
+ . 6  Gentoo had that a feature (search "portage feature confcache"). But as far
+ . 5  > maybe it’s that people would rather write rants about autoconf than do an
+ . 4  It used to be more common 25 years ago but once you got a wrong entry, it w
+ 9  I don't think you can have a simple notation that declares what is supported
+ 8  Is backdooring a software package a criminal act in <your, the committer's co
+ . 8  IANAL, but in the US this is covered by [18 USC 1030 (b)](https://uscode.ho
+ . . 1  Does this cover giving away code for free on the internet?  I suppose may
+ . . . 9  According to this [comment on HN](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=
+ . . . 2  I don't think you can unwillingly conspire. If someone hacks your compu
+ . . . . 2  > I don’t think you can unwillingly conspire. If someone hacks your c
  6  Where possible, it makes sense to guard access to sshd beind a simpler daemon
***************
*** 247,248 ****
--- 247,249 ----
  4  This essay is odd in the way it poses "skin in the game" as an one-way deal.
+ 4  I once found an autoconf/automake tutorial after having been mystified by the
  3  I’d love to be wrong but I just don’t see anyone actually catching #xz withou
***************
*** 260,263 ****
  3  Seems that this hack had an extensions system already in place  https://gynva
- 4  I once found an autoconf/automake tutorial after having been mystified by the
- -10  Comment removed by author
  2  This Bluesky post from security expert Filippo Valsorda adds useful additiona
--- 261,262 ----
***************
*** 311 ****
--- 310,311 ----
  1  > The first difference is that the script makes sure (very sure!) to exit if
+ -10  Comment removed by author