Intel & Canonical Collaborate On Graphics Preview Stack For Ubuntu 24.10

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

  • Espionage724
    replied
    Originally posted by jonkoops View Post

    Because it just works in any distro that decides to ship the latest Mesa and Kernel (e.g. Fedora), so there is no need for this.
    Latest isn't always the greatest, and specifically in Fedora's case I'm still appalled at the mesa-freeworld AMDGPU situation where Fedora Mesa updates would clash with the official-but-unofficial-codec-games VA-API acceleration package from RPM Fusion; all open-source with what's supposed to be the best GPU vendor for Linux, but any Fedora Mesa updates would lead to a black-screen on reboot.

    That's why I still recommend Ubuntu today for Linux: no codec or 3rd-party repo games

    Leave a comment:


  • sarmad
    replied
    Originally posted by geerge View Post

    Yes that's what I meant and that's why they collaborate with them. intel already do binary releases often as debs only so it's the path of least resistance for them. Ubuntu still has the numbers just like windows 10 still has the numbers.
    I don't think comparing Ubuntu to Windows 10 is accurate. Windows 10 still has the number, but is expected to wind down since the company behind it is moving to Windows 11. On the other hand, the company behind Ubuntu is still supporting it, so it's not expected that the numbers of Ubuntu installs go down the same way as is the case with a product going out of support.

    Leave a comment:


  • Svyatko
    replied
    Originally posted by Jumbotron View Post

    Why is it a shame that it’s Canonical ? Who does a better job of shipping a better Linux experience out of the box for most people amongst the Big Three, Red Hat, Suse and Canonical ? Another question is why didn’t Intel choose to debut this with Red Hat or Suse ? Willingness on their part ? Or Canonical is better able to be a partner ? Intel is a mega-corp with a product to push. They’re not going to go and partner with Arch or Mint or Slackware for the good of the community .
    If SUSE then openSUSE Leap, not Tumbleweed.
    OpenSUSE Leap 15.6 got newer Mesa 3D (24.3.1) only recently (from Experimental X11:XOrg repo).
    I'm constantly fighting with openSUSE devs to get new Mesa 3D for Leap, not just for Tumbleweed.
    Rusticl is not available for Leap from openSUSE, but available from community repos.

    It took about 4 years to get support for installation openSUSE Tumbleweed on x86-64 CPU with 32-bit EFI, for Leap it is still in semiprepared state.
    Last edited by Svyatko; 20 December 2024, 02:11 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • microcode
    replied
    Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post

    Guessing, but no future excitement, direct-competition with themselves vs release versions, and added confusion (why would anyone use non-LTS release like 24.10 vs rolling?).

    I'd be into using rolling Ubuntu, but likely wouldn't bother with non-LTS if rolling existed.
    That's what I'm saying, LTS should be checkpointed off the rolling release, which should replace the non-LTS releases.

    Leave a comment:


  • royce
    replied
    Originally posted by ahrs View Post
    until Canonical gets around to updating their HWE stack whenever the hell that is done
    It's usually done on each point release except the first one. 24.04.2 should be released sometime in the next 6 to 8 weeks with the kernel and graphics stack from 24.10.

    Leave a comment:


  • royce
    replied
    Originally posted by Britoid View Post
    Eh, RHEL is a decade ahead of Ubuntu/Debian when it comes to the server stack.

    If you want to see what open source software will be in Ubuntu/Debian in 10 years time, download Rocky/Alma.
    You couldn't be more wrong if you tried with regards to Ubuntu. Canonical's ecosystem of tools is second to none on the server stack. At least as good as red hat's, and far more flexible and license-free.

    Leave a comment:


  • woddy
    replied
    In my opinion Ubuntu is no longer the reference distribution (most used) in the desktop environment, as is not even RHE
    We must then distinguish server from desktop...
    However today things are changing, the classic LTS like Debian, but also Ubuntu or RH remain "insecure", although engineers do everything to make an excellent backport for security, it is not always possible to do it and not always doing it is painless due to some bug problems that are generated by the backports. Sooner or later they will find a solution...but for desktop users, a rolling or semi-rolling desktop is much safer provided there is a rollback system.
    On the issue of the Intel-Canonical collaboration, I imagine there is no surprise, among other things they collaborate for a ppa that according to them has only a test functionality.​

    Leave a comment:


  • ahrs
    replied
    Originally posted by geerge View Post

    Don't be dense, the post I replied to talked companies so I followed suit, clearly we meant Fedora.
    What's the benefit to Fedora when they're going to ship up-to-date kernels and drivers anyway? It makes more sense to partner with Ubuntu because if Intel didn't do this then Ubuntu literally wouldn't be able to use the hardware properly until Canonical gets around to updating their HWE stack whenever the hell that is done (they should have a rolling HWE stack in my opinion).

    Leave a comment:


  • ahrs
    replied
    Originally posted by geerge View Post

    Don't be dense, the post I replied to talked companies so I followed suit, clearly we meant Fedora.
    What's the benefit to Fedora when they're going to ship up-to-date kernels and drivers anyway? It makes more sense to partner with Ubuntu because if Intel didn't do this then Ubuntu literally wouldn't be able to use the hardware properly until Canonical gets around to updating their HWE stack whenever the hell that is done (they should have a rolling HWE stack in my opinion).

    Leave a comment:


  • jonkoops
    replied
    Originally posted by Jumbotron View Post

    Who does a better job of shipping a better Linux experience out of the box for most people amongst the Big Three, Red Hat, Suse and Canonical ? Another question is why didn’t Intel choose to debut this with Red Hat or Suse ? Willingness on their part ? Or Canonical is better able to be a partner
    Because it just works in any distro that decides to ship the latest Mesa and Kernel (e.g. Fedora), so there is no need for this.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X