Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Shell 3.10 Is Ready To Shine On Wayland

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

  • #31
    Honton:
    You will wake up one morning and realize Microsoft Windows is the standard and you will love it for the ease, features and quality. That day the sun will shine a bit brighter on you and the coffee will have a less bitter taste. I hope it will be year 2013 for you, because no one need to suffer that much.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by scjet View Post
      Mother of God, atleast KDE never needed a "fork" !!!
      http://www.trinitydesktop.org/about.php

      Ignorance is bliss, they say.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
        Considering that Fedora has included patches in things as integral as GTK in past releases, there's a good possibility we'll have to patch something in order to get Mutter and the Shell running on Wayland. Arch only includes vanilla packages, which is usually a good thing, but Fedora's tight integration with GNOME and JHBuild sometimes makes it difficult for GNOME devs on Fedora to realize what's missing elsewhere.

        Of course, these issues are usually fixed sooner or later, but there's enough work going into getting it working seamlessly on Fedora, which won't even be complete until year's end. So I'm looking forward to a little grief, with hopes that it's as much of a breeze as you've said. No doubt, the wiki will have a great deal of instruction on the issue.

        That's bogus. Arch doesn't only ship vanilla packages. They do patch things if they need to. I also haven't noticed any super Gnome integration, when I tried Fedora 19. It's exactly the same experience as on Arch. I always wonder why people claim that distro X is the best desktop Y distro, because of polish and integration. Seriously KDE is KDE. I tried KDE on openSUSE it's exactly the same thing as on Arch. I have tried XFCE on countless distros....it's XFCE nothing more nothing less.
        Last edited by blackout23; 09-18-2013, 12:07 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by bkor View Post
          As explained in my post, GNOME only depends on logind for some things. So if you really don't want systemd/logind, then you can, but it will lack a few things. The last communication from the GNOME release team stated basically "only for non-critical functionality". At the moment, the power bit and suspend require systemd. Though with some effort a distribution could reuse the old code if it still works. Systemd makes things easier at a desktop environment level. I like Gentoo, *BSD, etc, but there is too much talk and severe lack of code contributions. At the same time, systemd allows a big simplification in the code.

          Note that things will change with Wayland. See e.g. the logind VT switch functionality. I assume that'll be used for the GNOME Wayland support (so not Wayland in general).
          Powering the machine down or suspend is a non-critical function? Do you really mean that? In which reality is powering the machine down a non-critical function? "Oh, by the way, if you want to shut down the machine you have to install systemd!"
          Tell me again that there is no dependency on systemd. But let it go, Gnome will see that their already decimated userbase will shrink even more if they make it unusable on non-systemd distros.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Honton View Post
            You will wake up one morning and realize systemd is the standard and you will love it for the ease, features and quality. That day the sun will shine a bit brighter on you and the coffee will have a less bitter taste. I hope it will be year 2013 for you, because no one need to suffer that much.
            One day you will wake up and realize that the funk(Star)y dreamworld in your head promised to you by systemd and Gnome developers is nothing but a fake, going down the hill and unluckily pulling Linux with them. Eliminating choice is eliminating Linux. Want to have no choice? Go Apple, seems to be made for you.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
              http://www.trinitydesktop.org/about.php

              Ignorance is bliss, they say.
              ok thanks for clearing that up.
              I was actually wondering why I could never find a "MAINLINE" distro of say Mint-Trinity ?, or was the other Ubuntu-Trinity spin,... ? but there sure seems to be a lot of Mint Mate, Cinnamon, goin' round, even Manjaro's Mate and Cinnamon, not to mention many others being much better choices than Gnerd3.

              Trinity is just a "toothpick" to KDE, in comparison to those other mainline, heavy-hitter-real, replacement "fork"s of Gnome2/3 today. -Lol. -and that alone should have been Gnome3's wake up call ! ,

              Oh well, I guess they're still a"sleep", somewhere in Devland, dreaming of their Gnome4 "comeback", to replace their Gnome3 "Flashback". ?
              Last edited by scjet; 09-18-2013, 01:05 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by bkor View Post
                As explained in my post, GNOME only depends on logind for some things. So if you really don't want systemd/logind, then you can, but it will lack a few things.
                If that's true, then why won't Gnome Shell compile without logind and systemd?
                The Gnome team only want Linux as their platform, they're locking themselves down into a smaller fraction of marketshare because of it and it's only going to do them harm at the end of the day.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Honton View Post
                  Supporting other than Linux gets more difficult as Gnome starts to rely on kernel features like cgroups etc. Why waste the energy on platforms that goes nowhere when there is so much more market volume on Linux?
                  In fact, if I recall, in comparison to the most popular Linux OS's i.e. Android, Chrome OS, Ubuntu, none of them include systemd by default.
                  Now why do you think that is? If this is the best thing for Linux since sliced bread, then how come the biggest players haven't made the switch yet?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                    If that's true, then why won't Gnome Shell compile without logind and systemd?
                    The Gnome team only want Linux as their platform, they're locking themselves down into a smaller fraction of marketshare because of it and it's only going to do them harm at the end of the day.
                    Show me that it won't compile without logind and systemd.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                      Powering the machine down or suspend is a non-critical function? Do you really mean that? In which reality is powering the machine down a non-critical function? "Oh, by the way, if you want to shut down the machine you have to install systemd!"
                      Tell me again that there is no dependency on systemd. But let it go, Gnome will see that their already decimated userbase will shrink even more if they make it unusable on non-systemd distros.
                      I said nothing about powering down the machine. I said something about suspend. Furthermore, I suggested reading my previous posts where I explained this already. E.g. GNOME wrote and maintained ConsoleKit. Now we requested people like you to take over development. Aside from talk, nothing has been done for 1.5+ years.

                      So you only repeat statements, don't read. If you want to believe your view of things is right, cool. But to me it is sticking your head in the sand. The truth is out there! :P

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by bkor View Post
                        Show me that it won't compile without logind and systemd.
                        I've come up with errors running Gentoo before, it should simply work without having to be dependant on systemd (as of 3.8 and 206)
                        Last edited by intellivision; 09-18-2013, 05:20 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by bkor View Post
                          The truth is out there! :P
                          The truth is that Gnome developers only want to develop for Linux/systemd and screw the rest out of the market, nothing more.
                          If that weren't the case, then they would have given users an option that wasn't reliant on either systemd or consolekit.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                            I've come up with errors running Gentoo before, it should simply work without having to be dependant on systemd (as of 3.10 and 206)
                            Gentoo GNOME packagers chose to make it easier for themselves and just depend on systemd instead of offering choice. I talked to the Gentoo packagers on #gentoo-desktop on FreeNode, #release-team on GimpNet as well as in gentoo-dev mailing list. Anyway, you said it would not compile, it does. Show me the compilation errors already.

                            Aside from above, note that GNOME 3.10 is not out. Do you mean a kernel version with 3.10? It seems to take the Gentoo packagers a lot of months before it is properly integrated and stable. It would be better to look at 3.8.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by intellivision View Post
                              The truth is that Gnome developers only want to develop for Linux/systemd and screw the rest out of the market, nothing more.
                              If that weren't the case, then they would have given users an option that wasn't reliant on either systemd or consolekit.
                              Turning my argument around is a poor form of discussion.

                              Regarding not ConsoleKit or logind. What do you mean? Be explicit. Do you know what these things do?

                              You claimed several things, I'm going to ask questions on each one to make it easier for you to demonstrate if you're right or not. Good luck! :P

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by bkor View Post
                                Turning my argument around is a poor form of discussion.

                                Regarding not ConsoleKit or logind. What do you mean? Be explicit. Do you know what these things do?
                                Poor form of discussion to you perhaps, but not to myself or the majority of users using this forum. Not my problem if you dislike it.
                                And I mean power management, there must be a way to implement that without having to manage separate users' and their login session information.
                                And why is this reliant on Linux only cgroups? There must be other ways to design a system like this that isn't bound to a single platform.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X