Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian 10 "Buster" Currently Defaults To GNOME On Wayland, But That Still Could Change

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

  • Debian 10 "Buster" Currently Defaults To GNOME On Wayland, But That Still Could Change

    Phoronix: Debian 10 "Buster" Currently Defaults To GNOME On Wayland, But That Still Could Change

    As it stands now the upcoming release of Debian 10 "Buster" will provide a default desktop of the GNOME Shell running atop Wayland, but that still could change with a Debian developer suggesting the experience might not be good enough for this next release that they would be better off still using the X.Org Server...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...E-Wayland-vs-X

  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
    You can not code:https://github.com/schmidtbag
    Start programming and stop hunting me.
    A few things:
    1. How is my ability to code at all relevant to anything in this entire discussion, or the comment you replied to?
    2. Since when is github the definition of whether you can program something? I'm sure I do more programming than you on a weekly basis (some of which even involves using git, just not github), either for work or for my hobbies. Most of that code can't be publicized, either because it contains private information or because it's specific to a one-of-a-kind piece of hardware. Some of my hobby code is publicly available and open-source, just not posted on github.
    3. I am not hunting you. Look back through all your posts with me (from any thread) and you'll find I'm far less aggressive/antagonistic against you than many others.
    4. Bold claims warrant feedback whether you're asking for it or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
    I agree that gnome3 is perfect but I dont agree that it has HiDPI support which is an unnecessary bloated feature that gnome3 doesnt need. HiDPI is an Apple invention to trick users into buying cheap 4K monitors. I have a 4K monitor which does not work with my Gnome3 desktop with "wayland" or hidpi". This is a perfect resolution because it allows me to run my games at lowest settings. With my stock Fedora kernel and slow Gnome3 desktop I get 0 FPS while running Assassin's Creed 1 on Steam Proton and 0 FPS on Super Tux Kart because the gnome3 desktop with wayland crashes.

    The Fedora user eye cant see above 3 fps anyway so you dont need more.
    I legitimately had to do a double-take at your username and post count just to make sure it wasn't yet another joke account mimicking you.

    Leave a comment:


  • xfcemint
    replied
    Originally posted by retardxfce View Post
    I agree that XFCE is perfect but I dont agree that it has HiDPI support which is an unnecessary bloated feature that XFCE doesnt need...
    Ok, you win, I lose. Can't think of a sane reply to this impeccable logic.

    Leave a comment:


  • retardxfce
    replied
    Originally posted by xfcemint View Post


    Xfce is perfect by definition. All bugs are actually feature requests.

    Also, Xfce currently supports HiDPI better than any other Linux DE (which all have crappy support for HiDPI). I mean, name me ONE linux DE which support seamlessly moving a window between two monitors, while retaining correct DPI. There is none. Also, HiDPi support should primarily be a feature of a display server, not of a DE, so another thing lacking in the retarded Wayland.
    I agree that XFCE is perfect but I dont agree that it has HiDPI support which is an unnecessary bloated feature that XFCE doesnt need. HiDPI is an IBM invention to trick users into buying expensive monitors. I have a 1366x768 monitor which works fine with my XFCE desktop without any "wayland" or hidpi". This is a perfect resolution because it allows me to run my games at max settings. With my custom Debian kernel and low latency XFCE desktop I get 35 FPS while running Assassin's Creed 1 on Steam Proton and 54 FPS on Super Tux Kart.

    The Human eye cant see above 24 fps anyway so you dont need more.
    Last edited by retardxfce; 05-14-2019, 01:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    I fully agree with the first part. For the latter, I don't think it "runs" fine on 2 GB systems.
    I suppose I should clarify: it can run fine on 2GB. You have to cut away some of the fat and you're not going to be able to browse the web with a bunch of tabs open, but it is usable. Same goes for KDE: I use KDE for my main laptop and it uses roughly 300MB when it fully boots to the desktop. I use the latest version available from Arch, I use kwin compositing and I use a handful of widgets. My laptop has 6GB of RAM and I have never once used 100% of it. I don't use a swap partition at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
    Unused RAM is wasted RAM
    RAM is rarely unused though, because of the kernel caches.

    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I despise this sentiment. I suppose you just leave your car engine running 24/7, keep all of the lights on in your home, and spend every last penny of your paycheck as soon as you can?
    This kind of thinking that promotes sloppy code and wasteful behaviors, which in turn forces people to upgrade their hardware that otherwise should have been perfectly capable of handling a certain workload. If you have unused RAM, that should be because you bought too much.

    Ranting aside... I do agree that GNOME doesn't have a RAM problem, at least not inherently. I've run it just fine on systems with only 2GB. All it takes is killing off some unnecessary bloated services. The same can be said of a default XFCE install for most distros.
    I fully agree with the first part. For the latter, I don't think it "runs" fine on 2 GB systems.

    If it uses 1GB of RAM then you have much less room for caching, which will use your SSD a lot more, which will either swap to disk more, consume more power or just be more sluggish overall, depends on your setup. In either case, GNOME just sucks up a huge amount of RAM that could be spent on caching. It's not "unused" as some ignorants think.


    Think of it like this: every time you swap to disk, or a file is dropped from the cache, a less amount of RAM "used" by applications would have helped in this situation. Doesn't matter if you have 1TB of RAM or not. If it happens, it was impacted by the wasted RAM of GNOME. It's really that simple.

    Leave a comment:


  • xfcemint
    replied
    Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
    Unused RAM is wasted RAM, Gnome runs fine for me on 8GB.
    Unused RAM is wasted RAM only when considering RAM as a cache (for storage devices).

    Higer RAM usage relates to:
    - pricier computers, higher barriers to entry
    - sloppier software development, most apps don't really need the amount of RAM they use
    - your computer being slower due to having less storage cache

    On the other hand, given the current price of RAM, where gigabaytes are available relatively cheaply, it is OK for applications to use hundreds of megabytes of RAM. In that light, it cannot be said that Gnome Shell RAM use causes any serious problems.

    Also, cheap RAM allows for sloppier, and therefore faster software development.

    Leave a comment:


  • xfcemint
    replied
    How do I edit my post to correct mistakes on this teh retardest forum?

    Leave a comment:


  • xfcemint
    replied
    Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
    Not true, Gnome Shell uses javascript and is therefore teh bestest.
    Gnome Shell doesn't have a taskbar by default and is therefore teh retardest.

    Nice link. I like statistics. My favourite language is C++, but in the past year I definitively wrote more code in Javascript and Java than in C++. Might change this year.
    I was always wandering about Linux distro and DE statistics. debianxfce posted a very usefull and interesting link in this thread about that.
    Previously I was trying to estimate the numbers by looking at Ubuntu Snaps statistics.

    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
    How to turn gnome shell from hell to hell:
    https://fosspost.org/lists/turn-gnom...ome-extensions
    Thx. I might give another chance to Gnome. But I doubt it. When I see it has no taskbar by default, I know that its developers are retarded. Therefore, they will continue going in the wrong direction. When I see Xfce defaults, I see reason.

    Originally posted by Shiba View Post
    I will never use systemd, not even when I'm drunk.
    This forum has the hugest amount of arrogant narrow minded users I've ever seen.
    You are certainly helping a lot to raise the bar.
    Last edited by xfcemint; 05-14-2019, 07:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X