Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Ubuntu Phone 13.10: The Runway Is Clear For Mir

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,646

    Default Ubuntu Phone 13.10: The Runway Is Clear For Mir

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Phone 13.10: The Runway Is Clear For Mir

    While the Ubuntu 13.10 release is just over one week away, Mir still hasn't officially landed in the Ubuntu Phone images as the new display server. There's been some bugs but it looks like it will now be landing rather soon...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ3OTk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    396

    Default

    looking forward to click packages, which will also translate to the desktop, will be so much easier to make apps portable and to share them.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by madjr View Post
    looking forward to click packages, which will also translate to the desktop, will be so much easier to make apps portable and to share them.
    How do they compare to mac .dmg files, which I understand (I've never used mac, just heard about it) is the best in application install and uninstall due the process literally being, drag into a folder to install and drag out to remove. Are these similar or more like a .deb that carries all its dependency with it?

    Warning, talk to me like I'm 5, I'm very tired and will have trouble understanding.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dh04000 View Post
    How do they compare to mac .dmg files, which I understand (I've never used mac, just heard about it) is the best in application install and uninstall due the process literally being, drag into a folder to install and drag out to remove. Are these similar or more like a .deb that carries all its dependency with it?

    Warning, talk to me like I'm 5, I'm very tired and will have trouble understanding.
    im not sure if we will be able to drag to install and to uninstall but the new package will be kinda like .dmg the files will contain theyr on dependencies and stuff like that inside it, also meaning every app will be sandboxed.
    i might be wrong but this is what i understand.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    276

    Default

    The click packages are very similar to Androids apks.
    I.E.
    BYOD - Bring Your Own Dependencies
    Sandboxed - Declare what you want to use and let the user allow or deny.
    Not possible to access anything outside your sandbox if not
    explicitly specified in the manifest.
    No install scripts - Your app can't do anything until the user chooses to start it.

    It's simply a easier package that is safer (sandboxing, install scripts) and suits
    better in the phone where users tend to install everything they can.
    For desktop sand boxing is of course nice, however BYOD may be a pain in the ass.

    Personally I think they should delay the 1.0 (13.10) release to 14.04. It isn't
    done and Mir won't be tested enough. If they want they could release but
    tag it beta, preview or something like that...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Still it's not clear why couldn't Canonical use Wayland in the Ubuntu Phone.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Click packages too my mind is a really stuped idea.
    You can read all about it here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2013/08/21/...pload-process/

    Click packages are designed to only depend on Qt-libs (are Ubuntu-SDK-libs).
    If you app depends on external (non-Ubuntu SDK) libs, the developer has to bundle the library into the click package instead of using and installing the libaries from the official repository. Here lies the problem, instead on relying in the repo, they get:

    1. wasted storage, because the same library is contained and used in different apps
    2. static linking, insted of using the libraries from apt, a library version of click package is used

    It's in general the same problem as under MacOS which is also a security flaw. Who guarantees, that the package libraries are not manipulated or outdated ? Exactly, nobody. And Ubuntu's devs are saying that it's all no problem, they have sandboxing (just read through the comments). This is ridicoulus and simply stupid.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theghost View Post
    Click packages too my mind is a really stuped idea.
    You can read all about it here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2013/08/21/...pload-process/

    Click packages are designed to only depend on Qt-libs (are Ubuntu-SDK-libs).
    If you app depends on external (non-Ubuntu SDK) libs, the developer has to bundle the library into the click package instead of using and installing the libaries from the official repository. Here lies the problem, instead on relying in the repo, they get:

    1. wasted storage, because the same library is contained and used in different apps
    2. static linking, insted of using the libraries from apt, a library version of click package is used

    It's in general the same problem as under MacOS which is also a security flaw. Who guarantees, that the package libraries are not manipulated or outdated ? Exactly, nobody. And Ubuntu's devs are saying that it's all no problem, they have sandboxing (just read through the comments). This is ridicoulus and simply stupid.
    First: If you don't trust the app developer to not manipulate the libraries, how can you trust the app itself?
    Second (Why no dependencies): Click packages is designed for the phones, phones are slow. Dependency
    resolving requires every install to scan all installed packages to see if the dependency is installed. On
    mobile platforms this is real slow (look at raspberry pi). As mobile apps usually don't require dependencies
    (look at Android, no problem there) this is unnecessary.

    Click packages won't replace deb on the desktop where you use more advanced apps that usually pull
    in a couple of dependencies.

    Quote Originally Posted by shmerl View Post
    Those were already refuted. Canonical had no clue about what Wayland could or couldn't do. And especially now, those reasons don't make any sense at all. I expect Canonical to come to their senses in some future and to focus on Wayland again.
    Well, what Wayland does now have very little to do with what Wayland did when the decision was taken.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theghost View Post
    Click packages too my mind is a really stuped idea.
    You can read all about it here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2013/08/21/...pload-process/

    Click packages are designed to only depend on Qt-libs (are Ubuntu-SDK-libs).
    If you app depends on external (non-Ubuntu SDK) libs, the developer has to bundle the library into the click package instead of using and installing the libaries from the official repository. Here lies the problem, instead on relying in the repo, they get:

    1. wasted storage, because the same library is contained and used in different apps
    2. static linking, insted of using the libraries from apt, a library version of click package is used

    It's in general the same problem as under MacOS which is also a security flaw. Who guarantees, that the package libraries are not manipulated or outdated ? Exactly, nobody. And Ubuntu's devs are saying that it's all no problem, they have sandboxing (just read through the comments). This is ridicoulus and simply stupid.
    1. Space isn't extremely limited like it used to be. Most OSX .dmg .app files measure into the hundreds of megabytes each, yet hardly any users complain about them. Similarly, .apk files function the same way on Android and there seems to be little criticism there besides from proprietary software developers and that's mostly around piracy.

    2. This isn't a problem, but a benefit. Say for instance you have library Z v1.5 but v1.6 comes out which your script is incompatible with, apt-get does an upgrade and suddenly you don't have a functioning script.
    Having libraries bundled with the application stops this sort of breakage occurring.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theghost View Post
    Click packages too my mind is a really stuped idea.
    You can read all about it here: http://www.jonobacon.org/2013/08/21/...pload-process/

    Click packages are designed to only depend on Qt-libs (are Ubuntu-SDK-libs).
    If you app depends on external (non-Ubuntu SDK) libs, the developer has to bundle the library into the click package instead of using and installing the libaries from the official repository. Here lies the problem, instead on relying in the repo, they get:

    1. wasted storage, because the same library is contained and used in different apps
    2. static linking, insted of using the libraries from apt, a library version of click package is used

    It's in general the same problem as under MacOS which is also a security flaw. Who guarantees, that the package libraries are not manipulated or outdated ? Exactly, nobody. And Ubuntu's devs are saying that it's all no problem, they have sandboxing (just read through the comments). This is ridicoulus and simply stupid.
    Correct. Ubuntu is becoming a dumber and dumber distro every day. They have totally lost their minds over there.

    And now in 13.10 you have to go through all kinds of gymnastics just to get the adware deactivated.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •