Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Shell 3.10 Is Ready To Shine On Wayland

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

  • #81
    Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
    If it's true gnome depends on systemd then it's problem for many users.
    hmm for many? which bigger distro doesnt use systemd?

    Systemd Distros: Arch Linux, Gentoo (not 100% shure but 99%), Opensuse and of course Fedora
    Non sysd distros: Debian, Ubuntu, Mint

    Which distros thing about a switch to systemd: Debian, Mint

    So Debian isnt really a Desktop Linux but even there you can install systemd, as easy as apt-get install systemd.

    Basicly it comes down to Ubuntu, if you have switched from Ubuntu to Mint to use the vanilla gnome-shell you made something wrong in the first place, and I think such users would switch distro again fast if they want to use gnome-shell, if they even need too.

    Most of the time its only a few small features that dont work without systemd anyway.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
      Which distros thing about a switch to systemd: Debian, Mint
      Debian is the interesting one. I'm not sure if they will switch yes or no. However, they're planning to make GNOME depend on systemd. Which will automatically improve the systemd support. Gentoo packagers might do something similar, though tried my best to ensure to show them that they could have different options if they really want to. If most distributions _by their own choice_ support systemd in one way, them IMO arguments about if suspend is important or not becomes even more irrelevant. Claims made here that things are forced make no sense. The idea is to minimize differences and work together. For that you need cooperation. In the end it should result in less bugs, easier development. For that I am interested in the following distributions basically: Debian, Ubuntu GNOME, Gentoo.

      And because some people have really short memory here: I assisted Gentoo in ensuring they know they don't have to make GNOME in their distribution rely on systemd. Further, I like *BSD and GNOME should keep running on it.

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
        You will, once you realized that eliminating choice and depending on only one software is a bad thing for Linux. But of course you will deny that now. As I already told that Honton troll: If you are against choice and find comfort with that maybe try Apple, seems to fit.
        https://ohjeezlinux.wordpress.com/20...two-fallacies/

        Comment


        • #84
          Originally posted by bkor View Post
          Resorting to ad hominems and similar argumentations! Whahahahahah! Jeez man, took a while, but glad you have no arguments anymore.

          As said beforehand: No suspend was totally fine for OpenBSD and Canonical did some effort on themselves to make suspend possible. You seem to have missed this bit? Try and respond to that!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          PS: To make it really clear for you: Your ad hominem regarding me makes no sense as I already mentioned that at least Canonical and OpenBSD are ok with it.
          I have a feeling you're trolling a bit by comparing Ubuntu with OpenBSD. Why not NetBSD, Haiku, the HURD while you're at it?
          I liked using Ubuntu, even though I don't use Gnome 3 or Unity. It's what I install on desktops/laptops, be it text mode installs with LXDE on top (works fine even on Pentium II 233), Xubuntu, Mint 13 or Mint 15.
          I wonder what does that mean for the future of the Linux Mint that uses Ubuntu - I was counting on Mint 17 to be a great release, regardless of the flamewars about systemd vs the world or rpm vs .deb or whatever. Will they modify Cinnamon (custom Gnome 3) further, or hold back on the Gnome 3 version even. I prefer using something else (Mate, Xfce or something else if there's a similar alternative) but this can possibly affect me indirectly, or Cinnamon users.

          Maybe we'll have to live with Mint Debian in the future. But I liked a distro with fixed releases, some of them with 5 year support.

          Comment


          • #85
            Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
            This is bullshit and you know it. Gnome does not depend on systemd because you have declared suspend to be a non-critical function (ask anyone that uses a laptop if that is a non-critical function), so that you can say: "Hey, systemd is only optional, just don't suspend your laptop."
            You can't be real with that, if you really believe that suspend is a non-critical function then you are totally delusioned.
            I use a laptop, and the only time I used the suspend feature was to test if it worked, because something intrigued me. And actually, it doesn't work right, and I always forget to disable the timed suspension when on batteries. So I'm a someone who considers it non-critical.

            Originally posted by scjet View Post
            and what's with BSD rants here? was BSD mentioned here ?
            Yes, they were mentioned. Several times. Read intellivision posts, at the very least.

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by grok View Post
              I have a feeling you're trolling a bit by comparing Ubuntu with OpenBSD. Why not NetBSD, Haiku, the HURD while you're at it?
              OpenBSD has 2 people who package GNOME and work to make it works on OpenBSD. Canonical does some systemd stuff. I'm not comparing OpenBSD vs Ubuntu, I am following how they integrate GNOME. One of the things that should be done IMO if you're in a release team of a big project. Every member has its own expertise and focusses on different things.

              Comment


              • #87
                Originally posted by bkor View Post
                Resorting to ad hominems and similar argumentations!
                There was no ad hominem argument there. "insult" != "ad hominem argument".

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
                  There was no ad hominem argument there. "insult" != "ad hominem argument".
                  He said:
                  " You can't be real with that, if you really believe that suspend is a non-critical function then you are totally delusioned. "

                  Seems pretty much on the person to me, not about the argument. Maybe one of the others. Anyway, it is still funny.


                  Note that meanwhile I built mutter-wayland 3.9.92 in Mageia Cauldron (was waiting for the clutter release). Further, rebuilt gnome-shell in Mageia Cauldron with Wayland support as well. Wondering what all the "OMG upstream should do something" people have done aside from _only_ talk (especially the not listening bit). The Wayland support in Mageia ensures that the huge amount of Cauldron users can test it. Further, QA team can play with it as well. Nice progress

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by bkor View Post
                    He said:
                    " You can't be real with that, if you really believe that suspend is a non-critical function then you are totally delusioned. "

                    Seems pretty much on the person to me, not about the argument.
                    If that was the entire quote, then you would be right. But you left off the first sentence, which also happens to be where he/she justified that conclusion. In other words, that isn't an argument at all, it was a conclusion drawn from an argument (your quote just doesn't include the argument).

                    Insulting someone because you think they are wrong is not a fallacy (although it may be bad manners). Quoting someone out of context to misrepresent their argument is.
                    Last edited by TheBlackCat; 09-20-2013, 06:15 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by bkor View Post
                      OpenRC doesn't offer anything near the capabilities of systemd. Various components of systemd work via APIs (often d-bus). If you don't want systemd, write the same functionality without it. Totally ok, just make sure that the API is the same.

                      So instead of:

                      gnome-shell -> abstraction layer -> "systemd API" -> systemd component
                      gnome-shell -> abstraction layer -> "OpenRC API" (often not existing!) -> OpenRC component

                      we want

                      gnome-shell -> "API" -> systemd/OpenRC/etc component

                      because in practice, it is not just gnome-shell talking to some API, various components. This becomes complex and buggy really quick. Simple solution would be to make OpenRC offer the same APIs as systemd/logind/etc has. This is what Canonical would do for something basic (so NOT the entire thing, just the bare minimum) IIRC.

                      This is similar as POSIX IMO, just that these APIs are new, due to new requirements. And I forgot, but there are two OpenBSD developers with commit rights on git.gnome.org. They usually find and fix portability issues, but we move a bit faster than they can keep up unfortunately.
                      ok, so you "like" *BSD's ?:
                      You talk about systemd + Gnome3, whatever, like everything is gonna work out fine in the BSD's, hey no worries, whatever. You know developers @openbsd, I know developers in @lalaLand,...
                      Well, I haven't seen anything yet regarding "systemd" on any of the *BSD's, it ain't exactly comin' to town soon now is it ?
                      Why are you saying crap like this.
                      IBM/Redhat + Systemd + Gnome3 (revitalized), but don't worry, it's comin to the BSD's, oh, and if it doesn't, or instead OpenRC is the sober-best way to do do this for ALL concerned then you're just gonna flip-out again. ?
                      Dude, you care about the *BSD's, about as much I care about Windows, i mean, can you atleast admit that. ?

                      So how much work has really gone into porting systemd to the BSD's -oh that's right becuae IBM/Lennart "hates" the BSD's, -comon man -lol, , that's old, but "factual", slashdot stuff that we all know about now. Thise kinda "jack-boot" attitudes don't go so far these days.

                      I think the bullyshit that I'm gonna call, is the same bullyshit that attracted all the IBM/Redhat + Gnome3 + systemd fan-boys here in the first place on this sub-forum, and that's the 1st place
                      But please stop makin half-witted promises on things that I know you will laughably blame BSD for later. It'll be BSD's fault for not porting systemd right? -actually that in a way, is right. I can just see Redhat/Lennart now, bending over to help OpenBSD -suuuure.
                      But others are also right here, why the f___ should Linux help.port this over for BSD... ?
                      ok.

                      It's too bad BSD lost half it's cream develpment over to MacOSX, but then again, it's also too bad Torvalds lost his kernel to Android (which are makin' their own Billion$)..., for the next dozen years or so.

                      The point is, it would obviously be more advantageous to have an "init" system (what was so wrong with the old one, no really afterall, except for extra eye-candy boot speed?)
                      that can work beatifully across ALL other Unix-like OS's of the User's "choice" for gawd sakes. -that would be a noble goal, without prejudice. -hence OpenRC(since 2007), potentially could have filled that void with some un-biased help from all parties concerned.

                      If, on the other hand, what you propose technically, can work, and of course stably, for ALL concerned, then fine, I will eat my gawd-dam liquorice baseball cap in front of you.

                      There's just somethin' really fishy here, systemD,..., you know, "one ring to rule them all" and it's not gonna come out the way you think, in the worldwide Linux community?, mmm but then again, many bigger civilizations than us, have come n gone too, so who knows?
                      Last edited by scjet; 09-20-2013, 11:16 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X