Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.34 Should Be Hitting Clear Linux "Soon-ish"

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

  • GNOME 3.34 Should Be Hitting Clear Linux "Soon-ish"

    Phoronix: GNOME 3.34 Should Be Hitting Clear Linux "Soon-ish"

    For those anxious to make use of GNOME 3.34 with its many own performance improvements atop Intel's performance-optimized Clear Linux rolling-release distribution, it looks like the wait is still going on for a few more days but is coming "soon-ish" to the platform...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    It did hit Arch repositories, updated few hours ago. However, it doesn't seem more smooth than 3.3x versions, in fact, it seems slightly worse. What have started with 3.32.x I think, now have became worse, now it seems that 'CLUTTER_VBLANK=none' gets completely ignored by mutter/GS. It doesn't really negatively affect the low refresh rate systems, but it's not really expected behaviour.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by leipero View Post
      It did hit Arch repositories, updated few hours ago. However, it doesn't seem more smooth than 3.3x versions, in fact, it seems slightly worse. What have started with 3.32.x I think, now have became worse, now it seems that 'CLUTTER_VBLANK=none' gets completely ignored by mutter/GS. It doesn't really negatively affect the low refresh rate systems, but it's not really expected behaviour.
      You should definitely open a bug report on their gitlab. It's the only way the developers will take a look at it and hopefully fix it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kmare View Post

        You should definitely open a bug report on their gitlab. It's the only way the developers will take a look at it and hopefully fix it.
        I do not have gitlab account, but, vblank_mode=0 solves the problem, it was just more elegant to use clutter one .

        Comment


        • #5
          Typo:

          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          quickly took towards pulling in these GNOEM bits.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by leipero View Post
            I do not have gitlab account, but, vblank_mode=0 solves the problem, it was just more elegant to use clutter one .
            You kill the compositor's vsync, instead you'd rather report your issue.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by aufkrawall View Post
              You kill the compositor's vsync, instead you'd rather report your issue.
              I have no issue, clutter_vblank behaves the same way in the past (killing compositor's vsync = that's the idea behind it), the issue might arise with high refresh rate displays, and I can't test that anymore. In other words, that's the idea to kill vsync of compositor specifically and it doesn't behave as it did in the past (before 3.3x or 3.2x versions).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by leipero View Post
                It did hit Arch repositories, updated few hours ago. However, it doesn't seem more smooth than 3.3x versions, in fact, it seems slightly worse. What have started with 3.32.x I think, now have became worse, now it seems that 'CLUTTER_VBLANK=none' gets completely ignored by mutter/GS. It doesn't really negatively affect the low refresh rate systems, but it's not really expected behaviour.
                I really hope Gnome, KDE, LXDE, XFCE, etc. improve on this aspect and others.

                Comment


                • #9
                  In particular, some theme issues, the dash-to-dock extension being broken
                  They could ugh, I dunno, just not ship with unsupported features/mods enabled then?

                  I certainly don't think Clear Linux needs them to be able to stand out from other GNOME distributions.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Britoid View Post

                    They could ugh, I dunno, just not ship with unsupported features/mods enabled then?

                    I certainly don't think Clear Linux needs them to be able to stand out from other GNOME distributions.
                    Maybe, like me, Intel devs don't really like Gnome by default and would rather hold off on updating it until their preferred workflow actually works.

                    Also, seeing as how random extensions breaking with Gnome updates is one of the biggest complaints I see about Gnome, it makes sense that Clear Devs would want to wait until they could fix the issues causing their used extensions to quit working so people won't equate Gnome being broken and buggy to Clear being broken and buggy.

                    I don't even like Gnome because I've been burned by updates breaking my extensions so I applaud what Clear is doing. If other distributions did what Clear is doing, hold off until some extension bugs are fixed, there's a half a chance that I wouldn't have been update burned with extensions which means that my biggest negative about Gnome wouldn't have effected me near as much as it did and, because of that, I wouldn't necessarily equate Gnome with Plugin Hell.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X