Luc Calls For A Dead Linux Desktop If Keith Gets His Way

[squirrl]

Oh yeah and it's almost 2011 like my prediction-._

[FireBurn]

I'm still not getting the issue, I'm sure if there was an artical saying the drivers would be twice as fast by bringing them into the Xserver again people would be singing a different tune

Also they want to bring the DDX driver back into the Xserver not the Mesa 3D drivers which would mean the likes of Wayland wouldn't be effected

As someone who used to compile the whole of the Xstack daily I'm not seeing the problem at all, especally as drivers won't require as much IFDEFing as it only has to be compatible with the current Xserver not a multitude of servers

It's like Intel simplifying their stack, the fewer combinations there are the more likely there will be a working path

As for the Xserver being hairy or difficult to build - I've never had any issues - but if that is true I doubt it would stay like that long

It really would be interesting to know how many people in this flame war actually build anything directly from source pulled from git

As for the noise makers, try and remember who puts in all the work, it's the Devs, they should be the ones who choose, not people who install nightly binaries from DEB or RPM repos

[V!NCENT]

Seems like a two year old fight;
"We're gonna do this my way!"
-"No my way is better!"
"Shut up!"
-"No you shut"
"My plan is the best!"
-"Your plan is going to destroy the world!"
"OK... Your plan is realy good, except for the fact that it will make the project fail!"

Seriously, with all that limited manpower; Why even bother with all the extra work it is going to take?
*sigh*

[smitty3268]

How about a bit of a compromise: keep actively developed drivers (radeon, intel, nouvoeu) out, but move the old drivers in permanent maintenance mode back in to allow for easier updating. I imagine that would make it easier to change the API in X if wanted, as well as leaving the drivers people care about able to release on their own schedules.

[Hephasteus]

And what's the deal, is your name "Hephasteus"?

No but he answered your question. And since you can't reply to 2 posts in a row I don't think. I'm going to rant more.

The way I see this is keeping the "windows" model alive. The windows model gives every manufacturer a huge responsibility. They have to impliment everything their hardware can do and hook it into the operating system. This gives a chance for one company to steal all the resources. This is why you are getting a schizm already developing in the windows 7 desktop. Nvidia wants direct compute and physx. ATI wants direct compute and OpenCL. They both want to satisfy the graphics requirements of simple desktop gaming and the deeper more involved more technical more flexible OpenGL workstation cards.

Sorry but let's just get to the bottom line here. The gpu is an advanced floating point processor. If the operating system is going to have a chance in hell of taking control of every resource on the computer and using it with maximum flexibility and build an infrastructure of code and organize into projects the graphics are going to have to go into the kernel. GPU CPU you're not going to blur the lines between those two things until you BlUR THE LINES.

I don't know exactly what is going on here and I don't exactly what the technical hurdles are but I can smell the attempts of dominating and attempts of hijacking as everyone tries to force linux into their basement and drop the bottle of lotion down to it.

If you have to sync kernels to x to drivers, who cares. If it's summer releases of 2011 and there's still not decent open source graphics on linux then it can get mucked about with. I've spent over 30 hours the last 2 years just looking at log files watching the developement as linux has gradually taken more and more control over my system. Detected more and more hardware and learned to use it correctly. Just because it's not done I don't see the problem here. It's working.

[jbernardo]

I can only speak for myself, as one of the idiots that got stuck with a GMA500 and has been doing everything in his power to keep the drivers working despite Intel's efforts in killing them. The fact that this merge is proposed by an Intel employee is just the final irony - this move will kill any GMA500 or similar abandoned graphics driver, short of a "nouveau-like" reverse engineering that nobody has the resources to do.
And I can only imagine what would have happened if x had been "de-modularized" when the original psb drivers where released, we (me and the other users hacking on this) would still be stuck in a 2 years old x, with no way to upgrade, and with all the kernel integration we would also probably be stuck with the same old kernel.
So, as a end user that has already compiled and packaged kernel modules, libdrm variants, and xorg drivers, I can state I am against this merge. Not that I expect that my opinion will count much.

[squirrl]

"It puts the lotions on it's skin or it get the rubber hose again"

"It compiles the source again and again or it sits in the tin box again."

"It uses Keith's shet or it gets beat with the rubber whip."

"It commits Intel's source or it will get beat without remorse."

"Remove TTM or slapped with UMS again."

J/K!!!

[squirrl]

I can only speak for myself, as one of the idiots that got stuck with a GMA500 and has been doing everything in his power to keep the drivers working despite Intel's efforts in killing them. The fact that this merge is proposed by an Intel employee is just the final irony - this move will kill any GMA500 or similar abandoned graphics driver, short of a "nouveau-like" reverse engineering that nobody has the resources to do.
And I can only imagine what would have happened if x had been "de-modularized" when the original psb drivers where released, we (me and the other users hacking on this) would still be stuck in a 2 years old x, with no way to upgrade, and with all the kernel integration we would also probably be stuck with the same old kernel.
So, as a end user that has already compiled and packaged kernel modules, libdrm variants, and xorg drivers, I can state I am against this merge. Not that I expect that my opinion will count much.

I agree with you! Conflict of interest.

[nzjrs]

"It puts the lotions on it's skin or it get the rubber hose again"

"It compiles the source again and again or it sits in the tin box again."

"It uses Keith's shet or it gets beat with the rubber whip."

"It commits Intel's source or it will get beat without remorse."

"Remove TTM or slapped with UMS again."

J/K!!!

You are insane

[energyman]

For a real graphics driver update 1.10.1 won't do. You'll have to wait for 1.11.

It's the same sad situation with the kernel. Even if the new DRI/DRM ATI driver is ready and rocking with features I badly need, I can't use it; have to wait for kernel 2.6.36 since 2.6.35.4 doesn't ship it.

This situation is pretty much the major issue I hate in Linux and where Win/OS X beat Linux into a pulp.

because instead of waiting for three month (or pulling a git tree) you have to wait for years or hope that the vendor gets of his ass?

Yeah, sounds so much better.