Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.11.2 Has Many Changes

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by kigurai View Post
    I for one would surely welcome a well-integrated and well-tested stack. More functionality and less bugs, yes please. But I find this "locking down" perspective quite strange.
    When the GNOME project stops accepting patches from non-Linux and non-systemd technologies, then I suppose you have a case. Until then you are basically just reinforcing a destructive myth.
    I'm just gonna bring up that bit where a Gnome developer said he "didn't see the point of Themes" and said they should remove the ability to theme your system from Gnome...

    Originally posted by bkor View Post
    Are you/they a Gentoo user?
    I'm not, I think they are though. yeah...

    Originally posted by bkor View Post
    Please point me towards and logind alternative. GNOME developed ConsoleKit until systemd made logind available. Since then, only accusations of bullying. But in fact: systemd provides a solution allowing us to maintain less software. We switch, then this is called bullying? Strange world you're living in!
    Logind is fine. It was developed by the Systemd folks and is a perfectly okay thing. Systemd is a perfectly okay thing. The "bullying" I'm talking about is drawing in outside projects that have been around for a while to be under the Systemd flag when they didn't HAVE to as this forces people that want to use that project to use Systemd. This is honestly the only thing I don't like about it: a single stack is nice and I've used Systemd before. I like it.

    Originally posted by bkor View Post
    oh well, good luck with not helping out while complaining that others are doing things.
    Wow. Condescending much? Not that it would matter to you, but I'm learning C to eventually contribute to Mesa and Cinnamon (My favorite DE at the moment). It's kinda hard to "help out" when you don't know enough of the language.

    P.S. Always nice to see how a member of the Gnome release team treats Gnome users who can't contribute code but have criticisms :/

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
      I'm just gonna bring up that bit where a Gnome developer said he "didn't see the point of Themes" and said they should remove the ability to theme your system from Gnome...
      Which apparently they did not, as I see lots of people with non-stock Gnome-Shell themes.
      Can we please keep to things that *actually* happened, instead of things that *could hypothetically* have happened?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Honton View Post
        Yes this is the new trend. And you might as well accept it. Pick your stack, just like you pick your kernel.
        Nah.

        The strength of the Linux ecosystem is in its diversity. That's also what I like about it. I'm not interested in a GPL-ed Macintosh clone.

        Linux would not be interesting if you couldn't tinker and try different options.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          Your criticisms have no value because it is flawed, thus you best contribution would be to keep quite. Polite people who can't sing know when not to ruin other people's work by making noise.
          What about polite people who can't write grammatically correct sentences?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Honton View Post
            What you really hate is no one offers an alternative because then you could use that. The very FACT is that the systemd stack is a joint effort by so many talented people and money sending companies, that you can't expect anyone to match this. If YOU think these very people people and companies should be directed to do software YOUR way, then YOU pay.

            So far your effort have been nothing but angry words, systemd moves ahead every day.
            "no one offers an alternative" I'm currently using Mint 16 which uses Upstart + Cinnamon. A perfectly usable combination, thank you very much. If udev starts actually using Systemd functions (instead of just being packaged to depend on it), we have eudev.

            If that combo ever goes away (which I doubt) am perfectly fine and happy using Systemd, I'm not a hater of the software itself (it does provide quite a few things I like and writing a script for it was super easy).

            Here's a couple real questions I have though: What was the reason for Systemd's creation? I mean, I know it was a "pet project" and all, but is there any reason besides that? Then, why did it become so big so fast when it was created to solve the same problems as upstart and other stuff. Why didn't everybody (intel, etc) jump on the upstart train? Because Red Hat backs Systemd?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
              I said I hated their methods to force people to use it.
              Can you explain how they are forcing people to use it? I wasn't aware they were bullying the maintainers of udev into merging with systemd, for instance.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                "no one offers an alternative" I'm currently using Mint 16 which uses Upstart + Cinnamon. A perfectly usable combination, thank you very much. If udev starts actually using Systemd functions (instead of just being packaged to depend on it), we have eudev.

                If that combo ever goes away (which I doubt) am perfectly fine and happy using Systemd, I'm not a hater of the software itself (it does provide quite a few things I like and writing a script for it was super easy).

                Here's a couple real questions I have though: What was the reason for Systemd's creation? I mean, I know it was a "pet project" and all, but is there any reason besides that? Then, why did it become so big so fast when it was created to solve the same problems as upstart and other stuff. Why didn't everybody (intel, etc) jump on the upstart train? Because Red Hat backs Systemd?

                Upstart doesn't come close to offering what systemd does. If you want to know why it was created here's the announcement link: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html

                Things to look for in that post, imho, are: keeping track of processes, keeping pid 1 small, and on upstart.
                Upstart simply doesn't cover quite the same area, or do it in as well, as systemd. One of the big telltales of this is that, apparently, ubuntu has still failed to convert a very sizable chunk of their shell scripts to upstart files. Again, apparently, upstart has issues with both properly tracking processes, and doesn't offer anywhere close to the backwards compatibility with sysvinit that systemd does (which, itself, isn't perfect, but does an awfully good job just working with old scripts).
                There is a reason so many people from so many different groups have converged around systemd. It actually solves problems, and is architected extremely well.
                BTW, RH actually use upstart in rhel 6, so they backed the project for awhile.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                  Nah.

                  The strength of the Linux ecosystem is in its diversity. That's also what I like about it. I'm not interested in a GPL-ed Macintosh clone.

                  Linux would not be interesting if you couldn't tinker and try different options.
                  Maybe Linux shouldn't be interesting, in that sense?
                  Certain things should JUST WORK. I want acpi to be part of that. If you want to fiddle with your kernel config, init daemon, power management framework, language runtimes, be my guest, b/c I'm positive you will continue to be able to do that for a long time, but you'll probably be compiling them, and carrying lots of patches, but you can certainly do it.
                  The HPC folks do it all the time.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                    "no one offers an alternative" I'm currently using Mint 16 which uses Upstart + Cinnamon. A perfectly usable combination, thank you very much. If udev starts actually using Systemd functions (instead of just being packaged to depend on it), we have eudev.
                    That sounds like a misinformed post. Systemd currently depends on udev. Eudev case shows how clueless its maintainers were as they themselves admitted. Debian has no problem building udev seperate from systemd.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                      Wow. Condescending much? Not that it would matter to you, but I'm learning C to eventually contribute to Mesa and Cinnamon (My favorite DE at the moment). It's kinda hard to "help out" when you don't know enough of the language.
                      I don't know C. Well, I can make a very very simple patch to some existing code. I mean one liners. Who cares if someone can code or not.

                      P.S. Always nice to see how a member of the Gnome release team treats Gnome users who can't contribute code but have criticisms :/
                      You claimed that we don't care about *BSD? Seems you're turning things around. Further, I don't code, so what gives?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by liam View Post
                        Maybe Linux shouldn't be interesting, in that sense?
                        Certain things should JUST WORK. I want acpi to be part of that. If you want to fiddle with your kernel config, init daemon, power management framework, language runtimes, be my guest, b/c I'm positive you will continue to be able to do that for a long time, but you'll probably be compiling them, and carrying lots of patches, but you can certainly do it.
                        The HPC folks do it all the time.
                        Agree fully.

                        I use Linux a lot. It is really nice that you can adjust things. But adjusting will always be possible: you have the source, you tinker with every part, you can contribute whereever you want, you can build things exactly like upstream does. Tinkering forever: cool, but it also has to work. Then if it works, it can be fun to take apart and figure things out. But saying that the main purpose is tinkering? That's not why a lot of people are contributing. Seems related to: http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by bkor View Post
                          I see. Some Gnome related person sets up a website with a big "NO" on it and somehow it is true for all and everything, just because he says so.
                          Really?
                          This one person declares that Linux is not about choice and you use it as an absolute fact?
                          Wow, is that the style all discussion works in Gnome?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                            I see. Some Gnome related person sets up a website with a big "NO" on it and somehow it is true for all and everything, just because he says so.
                            Really?
                            This one person declares that Linux is not about choice and you use it as an absolute fact?
                            Wow, is that the style all discussion works in Gnome?
                            Wrong. Adam Jackson is a Xorg developer and doesn't work on GNOME.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                              Wrong. Adam Jackson is a Xorg developer and doesn't work on GNOME.
                              He said he was related to Gnome (a release guy or something, too tired to look up)

                              Originally posted by bkor View Post
                              Agree fully.
                              I agree as well. Most, if not all, low-level stuff should be a "single-stack".
                              Also I've seen a NO site that looks better than that: http://shouldiusetablesforlayout.com/

                              Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                              That sounds like a misinformed post. Systemd currently depends on udev.
                              It very well may be misinformed. I'm not a very big tinkerer, so most of my information about incompatibilities and what depends on what comes from online articles and friends who are tinkerers. My friend told me he couldn't uninstall Systemd on his distro (I think Gentoo) without uninstalling udev too, so we assumed upstream went ahead and made udev depend on Systemd.

                              Originally posted by liam View Post
                              Upstart doesn't come close to offering what systemd does. If you want to know why it was created here's the announcement link: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html

                              Things to look for in that post, imho, are: keeping track of processes, keeping pid 1 small, and on upstart.
                              Upstart simply doesn't cover quite the same area, or do it in as well, as systemd. One of the big telltales of this is that, apparently, ubuntu has still failed to convert a very sizable chunk of their shell scripts to upstart files. Again, apparently, upstart has issues with both properly tracking processes, and doesn't offer anywhere close to the backwards compatibility with sysvinit that systemd does (which, itself, isn't perfect, but does an awfully good job just working with old scripts).
                              There is a reason so many people from so many different groups have converged around systemd. It actually solves problems, and is architected extremely well.
                              BTW, RH actually use upstart in rhel 6, so they backed the project for awhile.
                              Thank you. That answered most of my questions

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                                He said he was related to Gnome (a release guy or something, too tired to look up)
                                What does that mean? He is not "related" to GNOME any more than he is related to KDE or Xfce. He is just an Xorg developer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X