Fedora Has Deferred Its Decision On Stopping Modular/Everything i686 Repositories

[Weasel]

If you need tons of Windows software, why bother with Linux anyway?

Because Wine works just fine.

Thing is decisions to make it not work are the crux of the problem here.

[the_scx]

Wrong. It works fine for applications that don't need strong 3D acceleration. 3D acceleration is available so the GUI works and does not lag, but it's not strong enough to do much more than rendering the GUI without lagging.

That is the point. 3D accelerations isn't just about the GUI. It has a strong impact on calculations, as well as video decoding and encoding.

What if I told you that copy-paste works with Virtualbox and VMWare (and KVM too for that matter)?
There are also special shared folder settings that allow me to passthrough to the VM as a "network drive" all necessary folders (this is not SMB, it's using its own internal system for VB and VMWare, KVM uses 9P protocol). In many occasions I'm literally only reading and writing to this filesystem with the applications in the VM.

A few years ago, I tried to use some CLI tools on Windows on VirtualBox. I had to exchange data between Windows and Linux, so I used the shared folders feature. And believe me, it was a pain in the ass because of problems with permissions, timestamps and symlinks. On the other hand, with WINE on Linux it works just flawless. I can actually call Windows programs directly in bash scripts, thanks to WINE.

That's because the Virtualbox 3D acceleration driver is basic. VMWare's one is better, but still gaming is outside of its abilities.

And it doesn't support OpenCL at all.

KVM is decent and they are developing that VirGL thing as a more powerful virtual 3D GPU, exactly for the desktop usecase https://virgil3d.github.io/

Don't even tell me about this crap.

At the moment, VirGL is immature, slow, buggy, unstable and completely unsuitable for games. At most, it may be suitable for desktop applications, but that's all.

http://virgil3d.github.io/questions.html

It leaks like a sieve.
It fails a lot of renderering.
It crashes some drivers.

You said before that OpenGL 4.4 is required for games (which is not entirely true), and VirGL just recently got support for OpenGL 4.1. Even Apple has supported OpenGL 4.1 for years! And at the moment, VirGL does not support Vulkan at all. Literally 0 percent of this API is implemented!

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=VirGL-OpenGL-Features-List

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=VirGL-Mesa-4.1-Capability

What's worse, two years ago performance was just terrible, like even less than 5% of native performance for Unigine Valley Benchmark.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Virgil-3D-F24-Beta-Tests

Of course, they could made some progresse since that time, but I believe that it is still pretty useless for modern games.
VirGL has existed for several years, but even with support from Red Hat, its development was very slow. Recently, they have made some noticeable progress, but it is only thanks to Google. They are interested in VirGL because of their Project Crostini that allows running Linux applications on ChromeOS. But still, it will be at least several years before VirGL be suitable for modern games.

https://blog.simos.info/a-closer-look-at-chrome-os-using-lxd-to-run-linux-gui-apps-project-crostini/

https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/opengl-vulkan-mesa-gallium3d/1029433-tracking-mesa-s-virgl-opengl-features?p=1029568#post1029568

Seems like a lot of the commits are coming from Google. Google must have vested interest in harnessing this work for their Project Crostini for Chrome OS.

And of course, it requires a recent kernel, so it is not suitable for LTS distributions with stable kABI.

But really, as I said I have a dedicated rig for gaming, also to keep some separation for security reasons.

If you love Windows so much, why doesn't you use only this on bare metal? If you need to run some Linux applications, you can use WSL or a traditional VM.

Of course, I am not going to force you to anything. On the other hand, you want to force people to abandon something that works for them. Just think about it.

[the_scx]

If for some reason I have to use shit like Ultrabooks for purely esthetic reasons, I would be running Windows, period.

Oh, so you are actually a Windows fanboy. That explains a lot.

Also, wtf are you doing on an ultrabook that needs NVENC or QSV

Have you ever heard about video encoding? It also applies to desktop recording and remote access.

they are toys for management (i.e. Office machines) not workstations.

Says the guy who doesn't care about the performance.

runs decently only a handful of programs, while most don't run or run like shit.

Pretty much the same as VirtualBox and VMware Workstation.

I don't care about the theoretical list of API supported (like NVENC), IN PRACTICE it's a crapshoot to get anything to work with it unless you are in for a fun week of tuning and are half-developer, or happen to need one of the few applications that are in gold or better status

If you need tons of Windows software, why bother with Linux anyway?

(and later versions of Wine didn't break this status, as sometimes happens).

You do not have to worry about it at all. Just use the separate WINE version and WINE prefix for each application.
BTW, Windows Update can also cause some troubles. The news portals are full of it. Personally, I think that they are exaggerating. But it doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist at all.

[the_scx]

I already said what I do to get shit running, I'm an IT guy, not a developer.

The is a little difference between software developer and package maintainer. Just saying.

Chroot with the kitchen sink works well enough. Packaging is just a matter to have scripts on top of my hack.

Chroot is one of the worst solutions. In addition, it is insecure as hell. Moreover, it won't allow you to run fresh software if your kernel is too old. I don't even mention integration with the host, because it almost doesn't exist.

"Windows platform" still means Windows 10. You aren't going to be using productivity apps on an Xbox if you can avoid it.

I wouldn't call the Xbox One system software "Windows 10", just as I wouldn't call the PlayStation 4 system software "FreeBSD". It is just like PureOS isn't Debian - it is a Debian-based distro. This is not the same thing.
Anyway, my point is that "modern" not always mean "better".

1. Windows 64bit runs fine with 2GB for a single application

It depends on the application. Anyway, typically you want to reserve a little more memory in the VM, just in case you need to run a more demanding application. It takes some time to start the machine (at least half a minute), so you do not want to do it too often.
It wouldn't be a problem if RAM was allocated dynamically.

2. That's what we do when software developers can't fix their shit, I know it's bad but it works and that's what most of the world is doing right now to keep trucking on (yes this is an issue that isn't just for people on Linux)

At first, people try to use the compatibility mode, wrappers and patches, even unofficial ones. VM is a last resort.

Even Walt Disney was using Photoshop on WINE.

https://linux.slashdot.org/story/03/08/05/1552255/photoshop-in-linux-thanks-to-disney

I don't. In its current status I have less than 50% chance of being able to run something in Wine unless it is some special well-known software.

I don't care if WINE has problems with software that I don't use, just as I don't care that iGPU can't handle many new AAA games that I don't have. As long as it works for me, I am fine.

Bullshit, I've not seen significant differences outside of workstation software.

472x performance increase is not significant?!

https://gallery.dpcdn.pl/imgc/News/55215/g_-_-x-_-_-_x20141104154712_0.png

You can say that just one random test proves nothing. However, in real-world applications, I have seen even a several-fold increase in performance. This means that in a quarter of an hour you can do something that normally takes over an hour.

It works fine even with Virtualbox's crappy virtual GL driver

https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/17014

I've installed fresh and latest Fedora 26 as a VM and when I'm trying to use it, I'm receiving slow GUI response and overall graphic performance is bad. I've tried to use 3d acceleration as well, so the guest starts normally but when GUI part is loaded and login window appeared it's starts to work so slowly, that it's impossible to do anything.

with VMWare that supports actual DX11 too it's great.

No, it sucks as hell, at least compared to WINE/DXVK. I know because I've already tried this way.
At most, it is usable to render desktop GUI, but nothing more than this.

KVM also has similar drivers but I don't use them much so I don't know. It does not lag anymore, I can tell you this.

As far as I know, VMware has the best virtual graphics driver. However, it still sucks as hell compared to WINE/DXVK.

But it works reliably once it is set up, and requires little if any mainteneance.

The problem is that it can't be setup on half of computers, not to mention the fact that it has high resource consumption.

The same can't be said for Wine or the whole goddamn circus of crap you need to keep to actually play on Linux, or god forbid, actually use some Windows work software.

As I said before, Steam already gives me a trouble-free experience. And WINE works just fine for me.

Because it's basically turning Linux into a lowerl-evel Windows shim without providing any form of security and sanboxing, i.e. it's NOT an evolution but a sidegrade at best.
If I want a shit unsafe system to run Win32 applications I can just install Windows (or "not uninstall it" from the hardware I buy).

Windows 10 is no less secure that typical Linux desktop. Flatpak was supposed to provide security hardened environment, but instead it's just a security nightmare.
Moreover, Microsoft has no problem with supporting WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux), because they now that compatibility and interoperability matters. Just think about it.

And even to get there you need a monumental amount of work on the Wine side that isn't really happening (and won't happen unless there is a sudden and mysterious influx of developers)

WINE is already working fine. There is no need for any revolution here.

You mean Debian compiles and offers packages/images for these archs. Who knows if that stuff actually still works at all?

There are some masochists who use it, just like there are people that use Haiku, Syllable or AROS.

People said Red Hat/Fedora/Canonical don't have the proper infrastructure or resources. I've proven it's not true.
People said Red Hat/Fedora/Canonical don't have enough maintainers to make patches for i686. I've proven it's a myth.
Now, you suggest that they may not have enough time to test it, although there are plenty people who use it. Sorry, but you are pushing where there's nothing.
As I said before, I have created hundreds packages. Many of them required patches and hacks for PPC or ARM. However, patches for x86-32 hardly exist, because there is no need for that. There is only a one exception here. In some cases, software like WebKit may have a problem to build on 32-bit arches because of memory issues. It is because GNU Gold Linker and BFD may consume to much memory (over 4 GB). But this problem affects only extremely complex software. What's more, it affects ARMv7 as well. But I don't see people who wants to drop support for 32-bit ARM. This hysteria affects only x86-32.
Anyway, multiarch/multilib support doesn't mean that we need all packages to be compiled for i686. About a thousand packages is just fine. And believe me, it doesn't stop Linux development in any way.

That's exactly what I'm saying, I'm just advocating for a true modern solution that is implemented now with the lessons learned in the last two decades.

So you are opting for a pure hypothetical solution that doesn't even exist on paper. It takes at least 5-10 years to develop such technology. I mean the moment when it will be mature enough.
However, people want to use Linux today. Not in 3, 5 or 10 years, but just right now. If we don't focus on the present, Linux desktop will end up like Plan 9, Inferno, JavaOS, Singularity or Midori - nothing more than a curiosity project. We need a reliable solutions today, then we can think about the future improvements.

Wine and porting over the Win32 API is NOT what I would like to see.

I would like to see more native applications. However, it won't happen until Linux get a significant market share on desktops. And this is impossible without interoperability.
Just look at Windows RT. It was a modern operating system, but it failed because of lack of applications. It proves exactly what I said before - no system without a decent software base can capture market-share. The only exception is the emergence of a new hardware platform, like it was with smartphones in 2007.

I would like to see something along the lines of Android, and Flatpak is where this is at.

Sorry, but Android model doesn't work on desktop. I mean, backward compatibility is good, but the sandbox is not what people really want on desktop. It looks good on paper, but it doesn't really work in reality. On desktop, applications tends to talk to each other and it is not something that you can handle by predefined interface. It is much more complicated. Sandbox may be good enough for some programs, but not all of them.

[MadeUpName]

For the record this year I decided I had had enough of being on call 24x7x365 so started a photography & videograhy company. All my editing, cutting etc gets done on Darktable, GIMP, Davinci Resolve & ffmpeg with one exception. I dn't use them becuase they are cheper than other though they definitely are. I use them becuase I have tried the CC suite and think it just doesn't work as well as the Linux based tools I have. The one thing I have to spin up a Windows VM for is converting my Canon CR3 RAW files to DNG. When the next version of libraw ships this fall that should no longer be a problem. BTW most windows apps are also still having issues with CR3 files.

[Weasel]

VM always works, Wine does not. End of the discussion.

To the contrary of you fappers I need to get a job done (or play a game) NOW.

Money isn't talking enough, because VM always work, and Wine does not.

I have close to 300 applications that are very useable in Wine (some have minor glitches/workarounds), that I have to never reinstall again since I just import the registry.

[calc]

Show me at least one thin ultrabook with GeForce GTX/RTX or Quadro equivalent.

ThinkPad X1 Extreme G2 / ThinkPad P1 G2 both use Nvidia Turing.

[starshipeleven]

Windows on VM always works like shit

Wrong. It works fine for applications that don't need strong 3D acceleration. 3D acceleration is available so the GUI works and does not lag, but it's not strong enough to do much more than rendering the GUI without lagging.

What's worse, exchanging data between systems is often a pain in the ass.

What if I told you that copy-paste works with Virtualbox and VMWare (and KVM too for that matter)?
There are also special shared folder settings that allow me to passthrough to the VM as a "network drive" all necessary folders (this is not SMB, it's using its own internal system for VB and VMWare, KVM uses 9P protocol). In many occasions I'm literally only reading and writing to this filesystem with the applications in the VM.

BTW: Do you remember the experiment that Canonical did with GOG games under VirtualBox?

That's because the Virtualbox 3D acceleration driver is basic. VMWare's one is better, but still gaming is outside of its abilities.

KVM is decent and they are developing that VirGL thing as a more powerful virtual 3D GPU, exactly for the desktop usecase https://virgil3d.github.io/

But really, as I said I have a dedicated rig for gaming, also to keep some separation for security reasons.

[starshipeleven]

Show me at least one thin ultrabook with GeForce GTX/RTX or Quadro equivalent.
blabla NVENC blabla QSV

If for some reason I have to use shit like Ultrabooks for purely esthetic reasons, I would be running Windows, period.

Also, wtf are you doing on an ultrabook that needs NVENC or QSV, they are toys for management (i.e. Office machines) not workstations.

Linux with WINE is a far better solution than ReactOS, because the second one is just a system at an early stage of development, which is not suitable for serious work.
Linux allows you to do your work, and WINE

runs decently only a handful of programs, while most don't run or run like shit.

I don't care about the theoretical list of API supported (like NVENC), IN PRACTICE it's a crapshoot to get anything to work with it unless you are in for a fun week of tuning and are half-developer, or happen to need one of the few applications that are in gold or better status (and later versions of Wine didn't break this status, as sometimes happens).

[starshipeleven]

Please provide RPM packages

I already said what I do to get shit running, I'm an IT guy, not a developer. Chroot with the kitchen sink works well enough. Packaging is just a matter to have scripts on top of my hack.

That's what happens when development fails to solve the problem. SOMEONE has to "fix it" by throwing hardware at it. Because stuff must still work.

UWP apps are modern and you can run them on any Windows platform.

"Windows platform" still means Windows 10. You aren't going to be using productivity apps on an Xbox if you can avoid it.

It is extremely silly idea to run the whole system that requires at least 1 GB RAM (4 GB in the reality) for just one small utility.

1. Windows 64bit runs fine with 2GB for a single application

2. That's what we do when software developers can't fix their shit, I know it's bad but it works and that's what most of the world is doing right now to keep trucking on (yes this is an issue that isn't just for people on Linux)

I'm one among many that thanks VMWare as our god and savior.

I don't need WINE to support all applications. I'm totally fine with the current status

I don't. In its current status I have less than 50% chance of being able to run something in Wine unless it is some special well-known software.

Hello! We are no longer in the 90s, where the only programs using GPU acceleration were games and CAD applications. Today, almost everything intensively uses the GPU.

Bullshit, I've not seen significant differences outside of workstation software.

Even UI tents to use GPU acceleration today

It works fine even with Virtualbox's crappy virtual GL driver, with VMWare that supports actual DX11 too it's great. KVM also has similar drivers but I don't use them much so I don't know. It does not lag anymore, I can tell you this.

It is, because it requires at least two separate GPUs

But it works reliably once it is set up, and requires little if any mainteneance. The same can't be said for Wine or the whole goddamn circus of crap you need to keep to actually play on Linux, or god forbid, actually use some Windows work software.

How is it (the proper multiarch/multilib support) sacrificing the future?

Because it's basically turning Linux into a lowerl-evel Windows shim without providing any form of security and sanboxing, i.e. it's NOT an evolution but a sidegrade at best.
If I want a shit unsafe system to run Win32 applications I can just install Windows (or "not uninstall it" from the hardware I buy).

And even to get there you need a monumental amount of work on the Wine side that isn't really happening (and won't happen unless there is a sudden and mysterious influx of developers)

Damn, Debian even supports shitty Alpha and Motorola 68k, which are super dead for a long time!

You mean Debian compiles and offers packages/images for these archs. Who knows if that stuff actually still works at all?

without a sane and stable API/ABI, Linux will never gain a significant market share on desktops

That's exactly what I'm saying, I'm just advocating for a true modern solution that is implemented now with the lessons learned in the last two decades.

Wine and porting over the Win32 API is NOT what I would like to see. I would like to see something along the lines of Android, and Flatpak is where this is at.

Nobody said that Windows 10 supports every Windows 95 application. But support for some Win95 programs is a fact.

That's a statement that came from a moron called birdie, not you, these discussions remind me of him.

Do you realize that this contradicts everything you said before?

I'm not contradicting myself, you maybe should stop trying to twart what I said and read it better.