Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

XBMC Ported To Run On Mir Display Server

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • XBMC Ported To Run On Mir Display Server

    Phoronix: XBMC Ported To Run On Mir Display Server

    The XBMC media center software has been ported so it can run directly on the Mir Display Server...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQxODc

  • #2
    Fantastic job. It seems that porting an application to Wayland AND Mir is not that hard. So there is no reason for community civil war in the end. It would be nice if they have a healthy competition like OpenOffice/LibreOffice have, that will push both projects to a better and better state. Already Wayland project seemS to have accelerated since Mir announced.
    Last edited by verde; 07-23-2013, 06:30 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by verde View Post
      Fantastic job. It seems that porting an application to Wayland AND Mir is not that hard.
      I know it wasn't the focus of your point but... xbmc is not just 'an' application, but 'the' application

      I'm waiting patiently for the day that I can boot a distro/appliance like openelec without any x dependencies (and with fully oss amd drivers on relevant hardware once the driver/acceleration quality/quirks improve)

      Maybe this is closer than I thought and more realistically....feasible.

      Some seriously excellent work and progress I'm seeing. As a naive user it's great to see real-world uses improving so fast I'm an area that really interests me and makes my life 'better'. Optimising the kernel for 8000x CPU racks is nice, but desktops and media consumption really make a difference to me and my selfish needs. Comments from friends even more ignorant than me like "Sweet jebus how does your tv do that?" gives me a warmer feeling inside than "so how do you load this macro'd xlsx on that funny looking desktop?" - helps make the world a better place too
      Last edited by runrun; 07-23-2013, 07:06 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by verde View Post
        Already Wayland project seemS to have accelerated since Mir announced.
        Where on earth did you get that nonsense.

        Here's Wayland development. Tell me just how you came to the conclusion you exposed, as what I see is the exact opposite. There was no effect whatsoever.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bne6LZYiPds

        You should know best than just repeat random claims with people who have no idea what they're talking about. Do your fucking research.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by verde View Post
          Fantastic job. It seems that porting an application to Wayland AND Mir is not that hard. So there is no reason for community civil war in the end. It would be nice if they have a healthy competition like OpenOffice/LibreOffice have, that will push both projects to a better and better state. Already Wayland project seemS to have accelerated since Mir announced.
          If the best argument for Mir is that having the competition somehow improves Wayland (which is a dubious claim at best, void of any evidence), wouldn't it be even better if instead of Mir, all that effort would be put into... oh I don't know, maybe improving Wayland directly???

          And just because one application has been ported to both Wayland and Mir doesn't mean that it's going to all be sunshine and cookies from thereon. There's still issues like games, proprietary software that gets ported from other platforms, esp. windows where the developers are used to one environment, one everything, no questions asked. Do you think everyone will go through the trouble of developing 2-3 different backends for their software? No, most likely they'll just use X because it's the lowest common denominator that runs on everything.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dee. View Post
            If the best argument for Mir is that having the competition somehow improves Wayland (which is a dubious claim at best, void of any evidence), wouldn't it be even better if instead of Mir, all that effort would be put into... oh I don't know, maybe improving Wayland directly???

            And just because one application has been ported to both Wayland and Mir doesn't mean that it's going to all be sunshine and cookies from thereon. There's still issues like games, proprietary software that gets ported from other platforms, esp. windows where the developers are used to one environment, one everything, no questions asked. Do you think everyone will go through the trouble of developing 2-3 different backends for their software? No, most likely they'll just use X because it's the lowest common denominator that runs on everything.
            Games and applications will use SDL, Qt, GTK and so on as they always have.

            Wayland has first class support upstream on SDL, Qt, GTK. Mir doesn't and probably won't.
            Last edited by rvalles; 07-23-2013, 08:13 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rvalles View Post
              Games and applications will use SDK, Qt, GTK and so on as they always have.
              Not nearly all of them do. There's plenty of applications, including games, that need to talk to the display server directly, and don't/can't use any toolkit.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dee. View Post
                Not nearly all of them do. There's plenty of applications, including games, that need to talk to the display server directly, and don't/can't use any toolkit.
                Games generally want OpenGL and will get it through SDL.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Sam Spilsbury,
                  Thanks for the Wayland support!
                  I don't really care about the Mir support though.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This could prove to be an interesting development for XBMC in regards to 3rd party devices.
                    In the future it would be an option for someone to release a device which uses Mir, and as it's licensed under the GPLv3, it would be ensured that no tivoisation could occur.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dee. View Post
                      If the best argument for Mir is that having the competition somehow improves Wayland (which is a dubious claim at best, void of any evidence), wouldn't it be even better if instead of Mir, all that effort would be put into... oh I don't know, maybe improving Wayland directly???

                      And just because one application has been ported to both Wayland and Mir doesn't mean that it's going to all be sunshine and cookies from thereon. There's still issues like games, proprietary software that gets ported from other platforms, esp. windows where the developers are used to one environment, one everything, no questions asked. Do you think everyone will go through the trouble of developing 2-3 different backends for their software? No, most likely they'll just use X because it's the lowest common denominator that runs on everything.
                      First of all I will just say that you dont have evidence for the opposite.

                      Second so you are saying that it would be better if we had one opensource media player, browser, office suite, distribution, de, display server except you approve otherwise in each case. I am sorry that's not open-source. Open source means forking. And of course NO ONE can stop you from creating or forking under gplv3. Don't like it. Don't use it. Don't port your app there. or port it and charge it. I can't see any problem there. Mir's problem.

                      Third in every project someone must take decisions. Why should Canonical and Wayland cooperate when there is clearly a direction problem between them. Mir is costing Canonical reputiation and money. Shuttleworth is not insane. Stop being haters and think more before judge anything. The easy solution was supporting Wayland. But was the best? I think Canonical is affraid to say public that Wayland is not viable for them. probably for technical reasons. I strongly believe that Ubuntu Touch wouldn't be in that state today with Wayland. Thats of course mine affair.

                      And last but not least to prove that forking is good i will let you compare today Gnome and Unity. Objectively Unity is more polished, modern, productive, feature rich and as Phoronix proved faster DE. Could Canonical do the same feature changes under Gnome? Of course not! You have an answer why Mir exist now.
                      Last edited by verde; 07-23-2013, 09:30 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by verde View Post
                        Fantastic job. It seems that porting an application to Wayland AND Mir is not that hard. So there is no reason for community civil war in the end. It would be nice if they have a healthy competition like OpenOffice/LibreOffice have, that will push both projects to a better and better state. Already Wayland project seemS to have accelerated since Mir announced.
                        Consider opportunity to pull your head out of Canonical and Shuttlewroth propaganda shit(because it is) and think rationally for yourself. There is no such thing as "healthy competition" between opensource projects. There is only competition in reaching the set goal, between projects own "as-is" and "as-planned" that is, but the projects benefit ONLY if their goals do substantially differ. They are fighting with themselves in reaching the goal, not with others.

                        For example, Razor-Qt profited from KDE and was never seen as "competition". Now it joined with LXDE and it also was never seen as competition.
                        Hell, even BSD profited from Linux opensource driver development by porting. Nothing by rewriting or fighting over community. Competition between opensource projects is actually very harmful.

                        Which healthy competition profit do you mean by mentioning "OpenOffice/LibreOffice" ?? Any proof (except worthless taskbar ofc) ? OpenOffice must be burrowed and resources should be used within LibreOffice, or he should completely change its goals to start being profitable instead of damaging behavior.

                        For closed source projects, them being completely different world, yes, competition MAY bring improvements in theory, but in practice it brings half-finished projects, with very short support cycle, that are quickly made obsolete by next on-purpose incompatible versions, so that customers upgrade, as in "paying again". It drains money, reassures bad quality over timescale, as well as lots of versions. This is exactly why opensource development is better and is next evolution step. If you call this "healthy competition", no further questions for you.

                        Originally posted by verde View Post
                        First of all I will just say that you dont have evidence for the opposite.

                        Second so you are saying that it would be better if we had one opensource media player, browser, office suite, distribution, de, display server except you approve otherwise in each case. I am sorry that's not open-source. Open source means forking. And of course NO ONE can stop you from creating or forking under gplv3. Don't like it. Don't use it. Don't port your app there. or port it and charge it. I can't see any problem there. Mir's problem.

                        Third in every project someone must take decisions. Why should Canonical and Wayland cooperate when there is clearly a direction problem between them. Mir is costing Canonical reputiation and money. Shuttleworth is not insane. Stop being haters and think more before judge anything. The easy solution was supporting Wayland. But was the best? I think Canonical is affraid to say public that Wayland is not viable for them. probably for technical reasons. I strongly believe that Ubuntu Touch wouldn't be in that state today with Wayland. Thats of course mine affair.

                        And last but not least to prove that forking is good i will let you compare today Gnome and Unity. Objectively Unity is more polished, modern, productive, feature rich and as Phoronix proved faster DE. Could Canonical do the same feature changes under Gnome? Of course not! You have an answer why Mir exist now.
                        Oh, of course he has the evidence. You check the article and report back. Its called wasted resources.

                        Second, yes, we would be a LOT better if we had ONE player, browser etc - but UNIQUE in goals. Could be 100 players with own unique approaches. But not 2 display servers targeting same goal, or two Office Suits targeting same goals. Read above - WASTE. And to add spice, its not an end solution, its a display server, its to be built upon. Having several toolkits damages the development rate exactly the same (yes, I am talking about Qt vs GTK useless battle).

                        The best solution was to fork Wayland and mod it, then report any changes back. In case they are needed at all. That's how stuff is done.

                        Gnome is destroyed thanks to Miguel and co. They abadoned user wishes, they shut the doors, then Canonical had to do something, since they never ever support or package KDE properly for unknown reasons. So they have built their own Gnome and called it Unity. Ofc it WAS different from existing DEs, so it was not met with criticism of fragmentation (except from Gnome), but with criticism of instability (Canonical's unique constant "feature"). Unity is by far not "polished, modern, productive, feature rich (you gotta be kidding me right???)" - Unity is simple and consistent in looks on all possible platforms; and thats where it ends. I worked exclusively with Unity 3-4 months, at first it was very nice, but finally it became very very limited. I got bored. Installed KDE. What a breeze. Canonical thinks now same way with migration to Qt. But this will hardly ever make Unity "feature rich".
                        Last edited by brosis; 07-23-2013, 09:42 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by brosis View Post
                          Hell, even BSD profited from Linux opensource driver development by porting. Nothing by rewriting or fighting over community. Competition between opensource projects is actually very harmful.

                          Which healthy competition profit do you mean by mentioning "OpenOffice/LibreOffice" ?? Any proof (except worthless taskbar ofc) ? OpenOffice must be burrowed and resources should be used within LibreOffice, or he should completely change its goals to start being profitable instead of damaging behavior.
                          Firstly, the BSD example isn't one that you should make in this comparison, there's a lot of competition between the BSD and Linux camps and some of the more colourful conflicts have been about drivers.
                          Secondly, there is a reason for AOO and LO, one is permissive and the other is copyleft.
                          In fact, in the end most of these conflicts boil down to licensing conflicts i.e. permissive vs copyleft.
                          It's hard to make both sides happy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by verde View Post
                            Open source means forking.
                            project a: "printf("Hello world!"); /* spawn web server */ printf("Goodbye world!");"

                            project b: Ooh, that looks nice, I could use it my project.... "printf("Hello world!"); /* spawn text editor */ printf("Goodbye world!");"

                            notafork
                            Last edited by Nobu; 07-23-2013, 09:44 PM. Reason: unexpected end of stream...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                              Firstly, the BSD example isn't one that you should make in this comparison, there's a lot of competition between the BSD and Linux camps and some of the more colourful conflicts have been about drivers.
                              Secondly, there is a reason for AOO and LO, one is permissive and the other is copyleft.
                              In fact, in the end most of these conflicts boil down to licensing conflicts i.e. permissive vs copyleft.
                              It's hard to make both sides happy.
                              Its own topic in itself, but BSD are free to port the ripe opensource stack and get some decent acceleration. Just to bash GPL or Linux more efficiently, that is. By the way, why permissive for office suit? Don't wake the StarOffice zombie (or any similar sub-kind).. Why would you plan to close-source the office suit?

                              Personally, I am over with it. BSD is for parts and interfaces - if there is need to connect to proprietary at all, GPL is for everything else. That's personal point and its not going anywhere soon. Works for me, if it doesn't for you, exercise your freedom.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X