Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Xfce 4.10 Desktop Feature Release

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by gilboa View Post
    Please post a link to benchmark that proves that gtk 3.0 is slower / more bloated than gtk 2.0 (or stop spreading mindless FUD).

    - Gilboa
    Every version of gtk3 so far has required XCB, which gtk2 does not. That's clear bloat.

    Note that upstream considers it a bug ( = should not need xcb), but that's the status quo still in 3.4.1. I have a bug open: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674465


    Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
    libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
    libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb

    I don't have benchmarks, I'm afraid. My definition of bloat is about size, a bloated app may still be faster than a lean one.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
      they have support for gtk3 now iirc.
      the themes and the gtk-xfce4-enginge have been ported, but i think that the xfce applications are still useing gtk2.
      So? The KDE dudes also have GTK2 and GTK3 versions of their Oxygen widget themes. The question was, however, if Xfce was ported to GTK3 and the answer is no.

      Originally posted by mlux View Post
      XFCE gets more and more awesome. In contrast to the gnome team they actually respect wishes from their users. Seen long term I think XFCE has the potential to get most gnome users to switch.
      No GNOME user with half a brain would ever switch to an environment that never ever has bugfix releases. Roughly once a year there is a feature release and in between not a single bugfix is released to its users whereas in GNOME and KDE land users get monthly bugfix releases until six months later a new feature release is made (in contrast to Xfce’s 18 months).
      And why would a happy GNOME 2 user switch to a DE that after years is still playing catchup with GNOME 2? Xfce 4.0 was released in 2003 and moved from a CDE clone to a GNOME 2 clone. Cinnamon manages to do new releases way quicker. I expect GNOME 2 fans to either adapt to GNOME 3 switch to Cinnamon, Unity or Plasma Desktop.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by curaga View Post
        Every version of gtk3 so far has required XCB, which gtk2 does not. That's clear bloat.

        Note that upstream considers it a bug ( = should not need xcb), but that's the status quo still in 3.4.1. I have a bug open: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674465


        Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
        libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
        libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb

        I don't have benchmarks, I'm afraid. My definition of bloat is about size, a bloated app may still be faster than a lean one.
        You *got* to be kidding me.
        XFCE is bad (??!?!) because of a redundant (?) dependency that requires an additional 3.3MB (!!!), and this, within an DE that weights in at (at least on Fedora 16) ~38 MB (well over 40MB with dependencies).

        Once word: IceWM.

        - Gilboa
        DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
        SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
        BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
        LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by curaga View Post
          Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
          libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
          libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb
          You are comparing 2 different libraries: if you compare libgtk-x11-2.0.so (gtk2) and libgtk-3.so (gtk3) you'll see there is not much difference in size. Same for the 2 gdk libraries (in fact there is the gtk3 version 30% smaller). Nonetheless this says nothing, the library size has no relation to the actual memory usage.

          The port of gtk3 to xcb is a good thing, libx11 is evil in many ways and xcb is its successor that tries to resolve many of the libx11 [locking] issues.

          About Xfce and Gtk3 it is fairly simple: there are plans to port the code to gtk3 and in a perfect world you wouldn't see _any_ difference between the gtk2 and gtk3 applications. That said the biggest issue holding us off from porting is theming. During the gtk3 releases a number of times the css theming in gtk changed, making it hard to get good working themes.

          So in the next couple of days a discussion will start about which gtk3 version Xfce requires to get decent (comparable to gtk2) theming, if all required functionality is there etc. In case it will be a step back from gtk2: no gtk3 in Xfce 4.12, otherwise porting will start in separate branches until everything works.

          The truth about gtk3 is that is has no visible gain for the average user, so IMHO highly overrated. From the development point of view it's a lot of work and because the policy changed after gtk2 (regarding deprecated api removal) it will in the future often lead to problems [because Xfce has a slower development cycle than GNOME].

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
            No GNOME user with half a brain would ever switch to an environment that never ever has bugfix releases. Roughly once a year there is a feature release and in between not a single bugfix is released to its users whereas in GNOME and KDE land users get monthly bugfix releases until six months later a new feature release is made (in contrast to Xfce’s 18 months).
            And why would a happy GNOME 2 user switch to a DE that after years is still playing catchup with GNOME 2? Xfce 4.0 was released in 2003 and moved from a CDE clone to a GNOME 2 clone. Cinnamon manages to do new releases way quicker. I expect GNOME 2 fans to either adapt to GNOME 3 switch to Cinnamon, Unity or Plasma Desktop.
            Just to inform: Xfce has a different release model then KDE and GNOME (and probably any other desktops). Because the development team is small (3 active developers), we decided that making stable release consumes too much time. So instead we make 1 stable release each year (time permitting, so 4.10 was ~4 months late), containing libxfce4uti-4.10.0, thunar-1.4.0 etcetc..
            After that we only make stable releases of individual packages: so the latest Xfce 4.8 versions are xfce4-dev-tools-4.8.0 (same as in the 4.8 bulk release), xfce4-panel-4.8.6 (6 stable releases after 4.8.0 which was in the 4.8 release), xfce4-settings-4.8.3 (3 releases after 4.8) etcetc.

            The single stable release consumes 10 minutes, a full stable release almost a day. I think the the last year Xfce made over 40 individual stable releases (for the desktop-critical packages), where as GNOME and KDE maybe had 10 full-stable releases. Both models work fine, but the latter requires a lot more effort (which Xfce doesn't have).

            http://www.xfce.org/about/releasemodel

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by nschermer View Post
              You are comparing 2 different libraries: if you compare libgtk-x11-2.0.so (gtk2) and libgtk-3.so (gtk3) you'll see there is not much difference in size. Same for the 2 gdk libraries (in fact there is the gtk3 version 30% smaller). Nonetheless this says nothing, the library size has no relation to the actual memory usage.
              I compared the right libraries, just cut the names short for the post:

              -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 455K 2012-04-29 15:12 libgdk-3.so
              -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 4,3M 2012-04-29 15:12 libgtk-3.so
              -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 595K 2012-04-29 15:13 libgdk-x11-2.0.so
              -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 3,8M 2012-04-29 15:13 libgtk-x11-2.0.so

              Oops, mixed the gdk ones around, sorry about that. Gdk3 is smaller.

              Comment


              • #22
                They DO bugfix releases, they just doesn't bump it to the DE version number, but to the specific component itself.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Does anyone know will this get into 12.04's backports? And if not - a PPA?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by nschermer View Post
                    Just to inform: Xfce has a different release model then KDE and GNOME (and probably any other desktops). Because the development team is small (3 active developers), we decided that making stable release consumes too much time. So instead we make 1 stable release each year (time permitting, so 4.10 was ~4 months late), containing libxfce4uti-4.10.0, thunar-1.4.0 etcetc..
                    After that we only make stable releases of individual packages: so the latest Xfce 4.8 versions are xfce4-dev-tools-4.8.0 (same as in the 4.8 bulk release), xfce4-panel-4.8.6 (6 stable releases after 4.8.0 which was in the 4.8 release), xfce4-settings-4.8.3 (3 releases after 4.8) etcetc.
                    Your “different release model” seems to include the complete lack of any public news: http://www.xfce.org/feed?lang=en says absolutely nothing about bugfixed component releases.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                      Your “different release model” seems to include the complete lack of any public news: http://www.xfce.org/feed?lang=en says absolutely nothing about bugfixed component releases.
                      Of course. That news feed is for Xfce as a whole. If you want to see the bugfix for a component ( like Thunar) you have to read the news/changelog for that specific component like:

                      http://archive.xfce.org/feeds/project/thunar

                      BTW anyone know of any live distro that has Xfce 4.10? I want to test it but not spend my time compiling nor actually have installed locally.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by nschermer View Post
                        Just to inform: Xfce has a different release model then KDE and GNOME (and probably any other desktops). Because the development team is small (3 active developers), we decided that making stable release consumes too much time. So instead we make 1 stable release each year (time permitting, so 4.10 was ~4 months late), containing libxfce4uti-4.10.0, thunar-1.4.0 etcetc..
                        After that we only make stable releases of individual packages: so the latest Xfce 4.8 versions are xfce4-dev-tools-4.8.0 (same as in the 4.8 bulk release), xfce4-panel-4.8.6 (6 stable releases after 4.8.0 which was in the 4.8 release), xfce4-settings-4.8.3 (3 releases after 4.8) etcetc.
                        That's why we like it!
                        A no-nonsense, no version-number-bonanza, no break-shit-at-all-cost development model.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by anonymous View Post
                          Of course. That news feed is for Xfce as a whole. If you want to see the bugfix for a component ( like Thunar) you have to read the news/changelog for that specific component
                          If it's actually Xfce’s attitude towards communication that users/packagers need to hunt for bugfixed components themselves, it is no surprise that Xfce only has three developers. The sense of progress also attracts new contributors.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I really like this release. I see lots of BeOS/AmigaOS influences here.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              This sounds nice, but I hope there are fixes for these problems from 4.8, as they are highly annoying:

                              1. Icons not staying in position on the desktop when a game or something changes the screen resolution.
                              2. We have had issues mounting secondary hard drives and other devices (which is not a problem in Gnome).
                              3. The panels often hang on top of programs displaying things in fullscreen (such as VLC).
                              4. It needs a proper volume knob like the one in Gnome and LXDE.

                              There are some other things I could mention, such as there being no tabs in Thunar (though I read that this is a deliberate move), no file search or connect to server functionality in Thunar (I have to use Catfish and Gigolo, respectively), and not being able to turn off the icons being displayed on my secondary screen (though for the most part I am just happy it is working with Zaphod Mode).

                              I am not trying to be down on Xfce here, as it is some really nice things about it - it has the best compositor I have ever used and it is fairly flexible. I would just like at least some of these things to be addressed. Now, anyone know where I actually should be posting this as to make a difference?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
                                Now, anyone know where I actually should be posting this as to make a difference?
                                Try their bugzilla:

                                https://bugzilla.xfce.org/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X