GNOME Mutter 46.2 Rolls Out To Ubuntu 24.04 Users, Experimental VRR Remains Rough

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • bearoso
    Senior Member
    • Jul 2016
    • 192

    #41
    Originally posted by QwertyChouskie View Post

    wlroots exists, and that's what basically everything that's not Gnome or KDE or Cosmic uses. Nobody can force Gnome or KDE or Cosmic to switch to wlroots, nor would you probably want to (the Dev effort would be way higher than any benefit at this point).
    But as a Wayland app developer you can't rely on wlroots's features because the major desktops don't use it. You have to wait until an official protocol is available and implemented in both KDE and Gnome. It's not exactly perfect, either. All the compositors using it are minimalist, mostly tiling, and I still have some problems. KDE has been the best so far, but I wouldn't want to discard X11 quite yet.

    I haven't tried Cosmic, and I'm interested to see how well it'll perform since it's written from scratch to target Wayland only. If it's really good, like defacto good, there's still a problem because the backend doesn't, and probably won't, have a C FFI.

    Comment

    • mmstick
      Senior Member
      • Aug 2012
      • 1121

      #42
      Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
      That reply got me wondering and instead of assuming and speculating I'll just ask since you post here: Way back in the day when Cosmic was essentially a massive GNOME plugin it made a lot of sense for PopOS to be based on Ubuntu. Now that Cosmic is nearing release, has the need to base PopOS on a stable GNOME distribution like Ubuntu changed?

      Or, like Mint, since you have the freedoms to do whatever you want, nothing Ubuntu does would affect you too much so does that make a need to base PopOS another distribution moot?

      Have y'all considered becoming your own thing entirely; like a new Debian-based distribution; like SUSE is to RHEL?

      To put all that in another, simpler way: since the goals of PopOS and Cosmic have changed, has that affected a reconsideration of choice in using Ubuntu as the basis of PopOS?
      We are not strongly affected by the decisions made in Ubuntu. We have our own base package for bootstrapping the system; which overrides the Ubuntu minimal and standard packages—see our pop-os/desktop repository on GitHub. Our only dependency on Ubuntu is that we mirror their apt repositories to apt.pop-os.org, which we then build on top of with the pop-os-release repository. We can override Ubuntu's packaging where it is deemed necessary, so it doesn't really matter what decisions Ubuntu makes.

      Comment

      • mmstick
        Senior Member
        • Aug 2012
        • 1121

        #43
        Originally posted by bearoso View Post
        I haven't tried Cosmic, and I'm interested to see how well it'll perform since it's written from scratch to target Wayland only. If it's really good, like defacto good, there's still a problem because the backend doesn't, and probably won't, have a C FFI.
        What are you inferring by backend? I wouldn't expect applications to want to dynamically link to the compositor. Applications are communicating to the compositor over a socket via Wayland protocols. It supports some protocols used by wlroots, and should have coverage similar to kwin.

        Comment

        • bkdwt
          Phoronix Member
          • May 2024
          • 79

          #44
          Originally posted by MrCooper View Post

          And Ubuntu apparently patch that out anyway, which means nvidia users still get the same old glitches.
          Source?

          Comment

          • smitty3268
            Senior Member
            • Oct 2008
            • 6954

            #45
            Originally posted by bearoso View Post
            But as a Wayland app developer you can't rely on wlroots's features because the major desktops don't use it.
            Why would an app developer care about the compositer? Shouldn't that all just be handled by whatever toolkit you're using?

            There are of course always exceptions, but that seems like it would be very rare.

            Comment

            • Daktyl198
              Senior Member
              • Jul 2013
              • 1575

              #46
              Originally posted by SpyroRyder View Post
              heir MIR wayland competitor was annouced just as Wayland had been spec finalised and planning was going to its implementation. Unity8 and their mobile dreams were built on MIR so its no wonder they didnt take off or see outside contributers.
              The thing about Mir is that it wasn't designed solely for Ubuntu's mobile dreams. Canonical saw the issues with the Wayland design that we are still dealing with now over a decade later and decided instead to write a display server to fully replace X.org and it's functionalities, but with a modern design. It was the "X12" that so many people that hate Wayland wanted, but when literally nobody contributed to the project and Ubuntu mobile failed, there was no real reason to keep it around so they abandoned it until some developers picked it up to add Wayland protocol support to it. It's still a display server in architecture, as far as I'm aware.

              I do wonder how quickly Mir would have been adopted compared to Wayland, as it addressed pretty much all of the issues of Wayland simply by virtue of being a display server and thus being able to quickly and seamlessly integrate all of the X.org functionalities that weren't related to displaying images on the screen. I also wonder what could have been with the Qt rewrite of Unity. I abandoned Ubuntu once they abandoned Unity and I've never looked back tbh.

              Comment

              • logical
                Phoronix Member
                • Dec 2016
                • 79

                #47
                If you target a newer library version, then you shouldn't expect it to run on on older one. This is simply common sense.

                Major ABI breaks are expected across major library versions. What is the issue here?

                The internal linux kernel ABI is NOT stable. The userland ABI is, however. This is a known thing. I have no issues with it.

                Originally posted by Sonadow View Post

                So why are you on Linux?

                Every version of glibc introduces breakages where software built against a newer glibc cannot be used on an older glibc.
                Qt6 cannot run Qt5 stuff.
                GTK4 cannot run GTK3 stuff.
                The Linux kernel breaks ABI every single fucking release. Modules built on one kernel release cannot be used on another kernel release.

                Comment

                • skeevy420
                  Senior Member
                  • May 2017
                  • 8633

                  #48
                  Originally posted by mmstick View Post

                  We are not strongly affected by the decisions made in Ubuntu. We have our own base package for bootstrapping the system; which overrides the Ubuntu minimal and standard packages—see our pop-os/desktop repository on GitHub. Our only dependency on Ubuntu is that we mirror their apt repositories to apt.pop-os.org, which we then build on top of with the pop-os-release repository. We can override Ubuntu's packaging where it is deemed necessary, so it doesn't really matter what decisions Ubuntu makes.
                  Thanks. Since I've never looked that deep into PopOS I wasn't sure. I assumed as much, but you know how that can go. I've only ever ran y'all's software on other distributions so Cosmic, news around it, and the hardware y'all sell is what I've always focused on when it comes to System76 as a whole.

                  As far as decisions Ubuntu makes goes, I hope they go with v3/v4 repositories or something along those lines. A lot of distributions and users would benefit from that.

                  When did y'all start making keyboards? When my current POS Redragon goes out I planned on getting a Das Keyboard 4/6 Pro, but that Launch Heavy looks pretty appealing to me.

                  Comment

                  • mmstick
                    Senior Member
                    • Aug 2012
                    • 1121

                    #49
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    Thanks. Since I've never looked that deep into PopOS I wasn't sure. I assumed as much, but you know how that can go. I've only ever ran y'all's software on other distributions so Cosmic, news around it, and the hardware y'all sell is what I've always focused on when it comes to System76 as a whole.

                    As far as decisions Ubuntu makes goes, I hope they go with v3/v4 repositories or something along those lines. A lot of distributions and users would benefit from that.

                    When did y'all start making keyboards? When my current POS Redragon goes out I planned on getting a Das Keyboard 4/6 Pro, but that Launch Heavy looks pretty appealing to me.
                    We started manufacturing Launch keyboards in 2021. I'm still using one of the first Launch keyboards we produced. It comes with an open source keyboard configuration app that supports Linux, Mac, and Windows. It is still based on GTK3, but will eventually be ported to COSMIC.​

                    Keyboard configuration UI. Contribute to pop-os/keyboard-configurator development by creating an account on GitHub.



                    More details here:



                    "Heavy" is not just a name. The full metal chassis is heavy enough to be classified as a weapon.
                    Last edited by mmstick; 02 July 2024, 08:30 PM.

                    Comment

                    • blackiwid
                      Senior Member
                      • Jul 2008
                      • 2057

                      #50
                      Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                      And Plasma was generally less stable than Gnome until the 6.0 release.
                      Well I wanted to say I think I remember that 6.0 had much stability issues, too. It was even like mindblowing that somebody would release a .0 release which is not supposed to be a alpha or beta but stable, at least from obvious bugs, and I think even the point releases barely fixed most basic problems, but when I see the release date of Feb 2024 as 6.0 I must have mixed that up with 5.0.

                      So you (the guy you answered to) want linux distros to switch ship because for a few months the claim is that plasma is stable, too?

                      I mean all the claims about Gnome's instability are moving the goal post, a security bug has nothing to do with stability and external software need to be updated, too, is not what stability means, he just bends that word to mean some other stuff...

                      The guy clearly read the headline which nearly contradicts but at least is not backed up by the articles content. Nothing is rough, a feature still not working that never did work is just a not implemented integrated feature yet, saying it is rough is pretty flamatory framing... which for journalists makes sense because "clickbait"...

                      Michael did exactly know what he do there and the guy did got played by him like a marionette. He hates Gnome with passion he don't care about the problem it just triggered his general hate about it.

                      The problem is that his statement was so absurdly phrased that it's obviously bullshit, because gnome does not have a problem with things crashing all the time, which is what STABILITY means... if you just use the word stability not "stable XY".

                      If a software is unstable that means it crashes... and that is just rich as like you said and any others noticed that a lot crashed in plasma till very recently maybe, while gnome was much more stable at that time.

                      Also from a stability point of view not adding this features fast, which is what gnome's doing, at least potentially increases stability, instead of rushing the first hacked together solution with a hot needle...

                      And there is this baseline assumption that you need 5000 extension to be able to use gnome, that this haters always have, yes if you hate gnome you likely want to install them to make out of it something that is as much as possible not gnome anymore... but there are people that like it.

                      It also comes down to look & feel, if you like the dialogs and gtk icons and all that pixel perfect stuff, plasma people always argue about features, that is never the main selling point why people use gnome.

                      That's also why there are so many forks of gnome but very few of plasma, because many people like the more round less aggressive peaceful looks of gtk. I mean if I would look into the bright colors (aggressive blue backgrounds) and this with white background blinking aggressive flickering icons, I would maybe also be so aggressive.

                      To be fair I have my fair share of rants, too

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X