Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Luc Calls For A Dead Linux Desktop If Keith Gets His Way

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by libv View Post
    This is not what is proposed here, this is not why the nvidia driver is mentioned.

    The nvidia driver was mentioned, because it is the most popular, and the one we hear the least people complain about. The reason for that is: it just works for more of the time than any of the other drivers out there.

    One major part of that is: people can just grab it and install it, and be pretty secure in that nothing else in their system, except the nvidia graphics driver stack itself, will change.

    This is what we can learn from nvidia (and unichrome, and to some lesser extent sis and radeonhd)
    Thanks for your reply.

    But it still seems that it is exactly this duplication of effort (i.e. Nvidia designs everything, from the kernel parts to the high-level interfaces with only their hardware in mind and reduplicates much of the code in X, the kernel and Gallium3d) that leads to this.

    Comment


    • #12
      I too am against this. Sometimes I want to try newer or bleeding edge versions of certain drivers. This would be extremely painful if things were demodularised. If they want to test the builds more often, they can very easily set up a script to do that. As for API breakages, let the distros worry about that.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
        Thanks for your reply.

        But it still seems that it is exactly this duplication of effort (i.e. Nvidia designs everything, from the kernel parts to the high-level interfaces with only their hardware in mind and reduplicates much of the code in X, the kernel and Gallium3d) that leads to this.
        The Catalyst driver doesn't do much of that stuff and compatibility is still there. So no, it's not "it" that leads to this.

        Comment


        • #14
          Modularization is the best thing that ever happened to X.org.

          I think it's the Old hat mentality of Keith to try this..

          It's really stupid to limit development on a broad scale just so it's apparently easier for a few people that work on X.

          I'm with Luc on this.

          Comment


          • #15
            What's the problem with frequently releasing (say once per month) bugfix Xorg updates (1.10.1, 1.10.2,...) and all its drivers at once?

            As long as those bugfix releases happen often enough, I don't see why getting rogue drivers back into the nest is a bad thing.

            Comment


            • #16
              So... does that mean that binary drivers breakage gonna happen more or less often ?

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by KAMiKAZOW View Post
                What's the problem with frequently releasing (say once per month) bugfix Xorg updates (1.10.1, 1.10.2,...) and all its drivers at once?

                As long as those bugfix releases happen often enough, I don't see why getting rogue drivers back into the nest is a bad thing.
                For a real graphics driver update 1.10.1 won't do. You'll have to wait for 1.11.

                It's the same sad situation with the kernel. Even if the new DRI/DRM ATI driver is ready and rocking with features I badly need, I can't use it; have to wait for kernel 2.6.36 since 2.6.35.4 doesn't ship it.

                This situation is pretty much the major issue I hate in Linux and where Win/OS X beat Linux into a pulp.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by KAMiKAZOW View Post
                  What's the problem with frequently releasing (say once per month) bugfix Xorg updates (1.10.1, 1.10.2,...) and all its drivers at once?

                  As long as those bugfix releases happen often enough, I don't see why getting rogue drivers back into the nest is a bad thing.
                  Well... I didn't expect to agree with you on anything, but you are right...

                  I believe this model would satisfy both sides. If bugfixes and driver updates are released once per month then merge them.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    For a real graphics driver update 1.10.1 won't do. You'll have to wait for 1.11.

                    It's the same sad situation with the kernel. Even if the new DRI/DRM ATI driver is ready and rocking with features I badly need, I can't use it; have to wait for kernel 2.6.36 since 2.6.35.4 doesn't ship it.

                    This situation is pretty much the major issue I hate in Linux and where Win/OS X beat Linux into a pulp.
                    Small sacrifice to make to have everything work out of box.

                    Windows. download all the drivers. restart a million times for stupid windows updates.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Jecos View Post
                      Small sacrifice to make to have everything work out of box.
                      It's not a small one. It's a big one. You're forced to pull all driver updates, not only those you want. And if one of the updates is not suitable for you, tough. And you have to wait too long to update in the first place, regardless of the individual readyness state of each driver.

                      Massive driver updates all at the same time is simply brain damage.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X