flux

Maybe consider static ip assignment in your DHCP server (e.g. internet router) if at all possible.. Then you can add a name to it to /etc/hosts.

Alternatively you could use Avahi to provide mdns names to your local network

Do you have that file? If not, then unset SSH_AUTH_SOCK will work just as well.

If it does exist, then I suppose it has good chances of working correctly :). ssh-add -l will try to use that socket and list your keys in the service (or list nothing if there are no keys, but it would still work without error).

At the end of the log you find:

822413 connect(4, {sa_family=AF_UNIX, sun_path="/run/user/1000/gcr/ssh"}, 110) = 0
...
822413 read(4, 

meaning it's trying to interact with the ssh-agent, but it (finally) doesn't give a response.

Use the lsof command to figure out which program is providing the agent service and try to resolve issue that way. If it's not the OpenSSH ssh-agent, then maybe you can disable its ssh-agent functionality and use real ssh-agent in its place..

My wild guess is that the program might be trying to interactively verify the use of the key from you, but it is not succeeding in doing that for some reason.

I guess it's worth checking if those names point to the expected binaries, but I also think it would be highly unlikely they would be anything else than just /usr/bin/ssh and /usr/bin/ssh-agent.

As mentioned, -v (or -vv) helps to analyze the situation.

My theory is that you already have something providing ssh agent service, but that process is somehow stuck, and when ssh tries to connect it, it doesn't respond to the connect, or it accepts the connection but doesn't actually interact with ssh. Quite possibly ssh doesn't have a timeout for interacting with ssh-agent.

Using eval $(ssh-agent -s) starts a new ssh agent and replaces the environment variables in question with the new ones, therefore avoiding the use of the stuck process.

If this is the actual problem here, then before running the eval, echo $SSH_AUTH_SOCK would show the path of the existing ssh agent socket. If this is the case, then you can use lsof $SSH_AUTH_SOCK to see what that process is. Quite possibly it's provided by gnome-keyring-daemon if you're running Gnome. As to why that process would not be working I don't have ideas.

Another way to analyze the problem is strace -o logfile -f ssh .. and then check out what is at the end of the logfile. If the theory applies, then it would likely be a connect call for the ssh-agent.

I think the main problem is that Chromium still contributes towards the browser engine monoculture, as it is bug-for-bug compatible with Chrome. Therefore if you switch to Chromium, it's still enough for the web sites to test for Chrome compatibility, which they will, because it has the largest market share. Users of competing browsers suffer, further driving the lure of Chrome (or Chromium).

On the other hand, if people switched to some other engine, one that does not share the same core engine or even the same history, this will no longer hold: web sites would need to be developed against the spec, or at least against all the browsers they might realistically expect their customers to use.

I highly doubt businesses would have been this fast in making the switch.

Well that's exactly the worry. Why shouldn't it be? It is their business and livehood.

As if taking down the systems is the biggest cybersecurity threat a company might have.

Apparently Lapce has remote development as its core feature. But I only (re?)learned of it today..

How didn't tramp work out for you?

A great git integration can work well in an editor. I use Magit in Emacs, which is probably as full-featured Git-client as there can be. Granted, for operations such as cherry-picking or rebasing on top of a branch or git reset I most often use the command line (but Magit for interactive rebase).

But editor support for version management can give other benefits as well, for example visually showing which lines are different from the latest version, easy access to file history, easy access to line-based history data (blame), jumping to versions based on that data, etc.

As I understand it vscode support for Git is so basic that it's easy to understand why one would not see any benefits in it.

It still maintains their market position, which has value. For example, you might not visit other sites because they don't have the content you want (and the content stays on YT because they have the viewers), or you might even share YT links to other people.