Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Upstream X/Wayland Developers Bash Canonical, Mir

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by zxy_thf View Post
    Nothing to surprise.
    I've found Canonical is just an Apple-wannabe for a while.

    But it will never become another Apple because it has never invested as many human resources as Apple had.
    To get a better UI, Apple replaced X server many years ago. But what about Canonical? It just adopted compiz to attract users with the fancy but useless graphics.
    Now they are gonna change that, and you're still not happy

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by grotgrot View Post
      (I do agree with your sentiment - gratuitous differences, not being a member of the community, NIH, CLA etc really are making Ubuntu undesirable.)

      Out of curiosity what distributions do you push people to? As far as I can tell Ubuntu is the least worst along various dimensions such as freshness (new package versions but not too bleeding edge), not requiring assembly (arch, gentoo), support (instructions and packages almost always exist), release cycles (fedora seems to have issues) and ability for anyone from beginners to the experienced to get going.
      Depends on the person. I usually, direct them the second newest Fedora KDE version (that way it's stable and not so bleeding edge anymore). Since they're usually friends or family, I can fill in all of the "not Ubuntu" gaps myself in the beginning with RPMfusion and what not. I also get them all the software they'll need and briefly customize it to their preferences. None of them are advanced enough to mess with 3rd party repos so it's not a big deal if Fedora doesn't have a large repo ecosystem.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by zxy_thf View Post
        To get a better UI, Apple replaced X server many years ago.
        Apple didn't "replace" X. They never used it to start with.

        They had their PostScript compositor in OS X 10.0, and in OS 9 and earlier they used a custom kernel windowing system, like older Windows (modern Windows offloads some work to the userspace dwm.exe; most of the windowing system, like input and so on, are still in the kernel).

        No version of X can run natively on any version of upstream Mac OS except as a proxy to the native windowing system.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by grotgrot View Post
          On Ubuntu I use these instructions to get rid of all the Ubuntu specific stuff and get a more genuine Gnome experience. If that approach doesn't work in 13.04 then I will definitely quite Ubuntu, almost certainly for Arch. The only remaining problem is why to recommend to new users since I still don't have a better answer than Ubuntu.
          I'd recommend Mint, it's just as easy to install as Ubuntu and has far less problems.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by asdx
            RAOF is a fucking idiot.
            No, he's not.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by mark45 View Post
              Even if it's true (they're more mature) - what is easier, to write your own display server or join forces with the rest of the players behind Wayland and get those companies to improve their drivers? Me thinks the latter is the clearly better option.
              in my experience the first is more often the esier one. forgot the many complaints about slow reaction from the devs, not incorporating upstream suggestions? we all know how slow and stubborn such projects can react.

              but i do not know what is in this particular case, though. my statement is meant in general, not saying that it is actually the case with the wayland project. joining forces only works if you can really join. but in reality not all are allowed to really join.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by grotgrot View Post
                I was developing an Apache module, along with other software. It wouldn't work with no apparent explanation as to why. Eventually I'd find a clue, address it and try again. This would happen several times. I didn't want to disable selinux since then everyone I gave the module to would also have to do so, which is clearly the wrong thing. The issue wasn't the existence of selinux, but rather that diagnosing something you wanted to happen and didn't was extremely tedious.
                You may have found http://linux.die.net/man/8/httpd_selinux useful. That's what I use for a reference when I'm bashing something to work on my web server. SELinux really *is* a good thing to have on server boxes, once you figure out how to set things up.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                  And gnome developers don't suffer from the NIH syndrome? Unity for example, was available before gnome shell.
                  Rubbish. Not even close.

                  "Unity debuted in the netbook edition of Ubuntu 10.10." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_...environment%29

                  * Mon Aug 10 2009 Owen Taylor <[email protected]> - 2.27.0-1
                  - Initial version

                  - gnome-shell changelog.

                  GNOME 3.0's release was after Unity's, but Shell was widely known about and available as a preview long before Unity. Several distros had shell packages long before GNOME 3.0 came out.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by AdamW View Post
                    SELinux really *is* a good thing to have on server boxes, once you figure out how to set things up.
                    I agree which is why I didn't disable it. I was doing this work quite a few years ago. I think back then nothing was logged if there was an SElinux violation which is what made life so much harder. Similar things happen on Ubuntu today - you can't strace a random process, but at least you get an immediate message telling you what happened and how to fix it. And you get apparmor on Ubuntu, and I wish they had picked selinux instead. (Yet another reason to move.)

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by a user View Post
                      in my experience the first is more often the esier one. forgot the many complaints about slow reaction from the devs, not incorporating upstream suggestions? we all know how slow and stubborn such projects can react.

                      but i do not know what is in this particular case, though. my statement is meant in general, not saying that it is actually the case with the wayland project. joining forces only works if you can really join. but in reality not all are allowed to really join.
                      In this case they didn't even try to contribute to or influence the wayland project. If they had and failed I would have understood why they wanted to roll their own display server.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X