Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 40 Cleared To Ship AMD ROCm 6, Packages May Reintroduce KDE X11 Support

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by fallingcats View Post
    Fedora, the (b)leading edge distro, is; just like they have always done. They've done it with gnome, they've adopted pulseaudio and systemd before they were ready, and now they're doing it with Wayland on their KDE spin.​
    Which is of course fine, that's what Fedora it is and always has been: A testing ground for RHEL.
    You've got a very valid point.

    I'd like to point out that at least they didn't enforce pulseaudio the way Ubuntu did (same timeframe as Fedora,) and offered a way smoother transition to systemd than what Arch offered (spent the whole afternoon on it at the time.) What I want to highlight is that in my experience, Fedora has been transitioning to new software very fast, but quite gracefully to say the least, and I never felt oppressed by it.
    ​​​​

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Weasel View Post
      BTW I love this comment from the issue tracker:BECAUSE IT'S SO TRUE, same with "patches welcome" but they in fact get rejected because they refuse.

      It's just a scapegoat argument from clowns.
      Please don't insult people.

      I see you feel for Kevin's rethoric and missing the whole point: how those packages are implemented, they introduce a *dependency* on ours.

      And that's besides all the _support_ requests that we will get when stuff doesn't work on X11.

      People who are not involved have no idea of the amount of extra work that brings, even if it's just to tell the requester: "forward this issue to Kevin please as he is the maintainer". ( the user doesn't care who the maintainer is, they just want whatever problem they have solved)

      Comment


      • #33
        Having read

        * https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3165
        * https://lists.fedoraproject.org/arch...MEAJVGM2RYUOW/

        The plasma-x11 partisans come across as bullies, acting in bad faith. I am admittedly biased, as I'm coming in with existing expectations of people who jump out from under bridges.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post

          I know they aren't my point is that if KDE wants to migrate away from x11, they need to migrate away from x11, not just tell distros to do so and cross their fingers. This goes for any project of course, not just KDE, and not just x11.
          What Fedora's KDE SIG is doing and what KDE Actual is doing are two different things. Fedora is wanting to remove all X11 support, go Wayland only. KDE didn't tell them to do that, they're doing that on their own. Fedora is just being Fedora.

          KDE, however, only changed the default session from X11 to Wayland. I'm not sure about an ETA on when KDE is dropping X11 entirely. As a user, I know that the X11 and Wayland Plasma sessions are different enough that the X11 session shouldn't even be there until there they solve the issue where X11 and Wayland use different settings and switching between the two leads to a horrible user experience around UI scaling settings. Even if KDE is going to support X11 with Plasma 6, it shouldn't be installed by default.

          ngraham If you can, can you clear the air around that? What's the KDE plan in regards to X11 support long term?

          Comment


          • #35
            As of right now there are no concrete plans to drop X11 support in KDE. However it should be obvious to everyone that the writing is on the wall and eventually I do expect X11 support to be dropped as the X11 session loses users and developers who care about it. There is no specific timeframe for what "eventually" actually means though. It could be 5 years, or could be 15 years.

            Note that there will still XWayland support for the foreseeable future.​ Removing that compatibility layer will probably never make sense because I expect there will always be some old apps and games that never port to Wayland.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by mrg666 View Post
              Nobody can be refused if they want to take the code and add what they want. But you are not allowed to come and dump your stupid ideas in my project.
              Nobody cares about your project. But when your project says something like "Contributions welcome" or "maintainers welcome, otherwise we drop it" and then REFUSE them when they are being contributed/someone steps up, then you're the entire circus.

              Who said anything about "for free"? And I was talking in general btw. I've seen so many projects completely ignore someone willing to take up the task they really don't want to. They think they're being smart by using "rhetorical" comments, hoping nobody steps up, even though they end up wrong.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Weasel View Post
                Nobody cares about your project. But when your project says something like "Contributions welcome" or "maintainers welcome, otherwise we drop it" and then REFUSE them when they are being contributed/someone steps up, then you're the entire circus.

                Who said anything about "for free"? And I was talking in general btw. I've seen so many projects completely ignore someone willing to take up the task they really don't want to. They think they're being smart by using "rhetorical" comments, hoping nobody steps up, even though they end up wrong.
                You're missing the point. Both the contributions and maintainers are welcome assuming what they want to contribute or maintain aligns with the project that they want to contribute towards. Someone wanting to maintain an X11 environment on a Wayland only distribution would be no different than if someone wanted to add OpenRC to Fedora's repos since Fedora is a systemd-only distribution. X11 on Fedora is no different than OpenRC on Fedora. They're either going to have to COPR it up or fork Fedora like Devuan did Debian because their goals aren't mutually exclusive.

                If someone wants to contribute and maintain something that goes in the opposite direction of a project's vision, that isn't necessarily going to be welcome. At some point it's like showing up at a Pro Choice rally with Baby Killer signs.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Mathias View Post
                  I wonder how that pytorch package works. Does it come with CUDA acceleration (default) or CPU only? Or can I even install it with Rocm? I wasted hours getting pytorch-Rocm working on Fedora with my Navi1 card and it still doesn't work... Would be awesome if DNF could solve that for me. But given that pytorch only supports ROCm 5.7 and F40 will package 6.0, I won't hold my breath.
                  For Fedora 40, the pytorch package will be CPU only. It's less than ideal and does limit the utility of that package but it is a place to start from and we're not done.

                  We are actively working to get pytorch with ROCm acceleration packaged in Fedora but that is proving to be a much more difficult problem. At the moment, we're hoping to have that ready for Fedora 41 but it's still a work in progress.

                  I'm not aware of anyone working to get CUDA working with the Fedora packaged pytorch but that doesn't meant that nobody is. The primary problem with getting CUDA to work is the licensing of the CUDA bits; as far as I know, the current CUDA stuff is not packageable in Fedora's repos due to licensing. It might be possible to have something hosted outside Fedora's repos that could add the bits needed to enable CUDA acceleration with the Fedora packaged pytorch but that isn't what we're focused on at the moment.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by schwarzman View Post

                    I guess you are just trolling but for the benefit of doubt: "pytorch" actually contains a lot of C++ code. It is so much that "pytorch" developers (the ones that make pytorch, not pytorch users) actually need to write a lot of "C++". In the end it makes sense, given that pytorch at its very core is a collection of different compilers and interpreters.

                    Even if you're not particularly interested in AI, if you still have a soft spot for compiler construction from your old university days, I encourage you to explore PyTorch.. You can learn a lot about complex compiler challenges.
                    Well, yeah. A lot of the python packaging dependency mess is caused by performance-critical parts of python libraries being written in other languages with their own build tools and dependency management (or lack thereof).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
                      You're missing the point. Both the contributions and maintainers are welcome assuming what they want to contribute or maintain aligns with the project that they want to contribute towards. Someone wanting to maintain an X11 environment on a Wayland only distribution would be no different than if someone wanted to add OpenRC to Fedora's repos since Fedora is a systemd-only distribution. X11 on Fedora is no different than OpenRC on Fedora. They're either going to have to COPR it up or fork Fedora like Devuan did Debian because their goals aren't mutually exclusive.

                      If someone wants to contribute and maintain something that goes in the opposite direction of a project's vision, that isn't necessarily going to be welcome. At some point it's like showing up at a Pro Choice rally with Baby Killer signs.
                      No you are missing the point. The whole topic was about maintainers whose excuse for dropping something is either "unmaintained", or "no devs for it" (to supply patches). Pretty sure Fedora's reason for dropping OpenRC wasn't either of those, so your comparison falls flat.

                      How can you fucking say "this is unmaintained so we're dropping it" and refuse someone who steps up to maintain it? Don't you see how much of a clownery that is?

                      And I was referring to the comment at hand, it seems they changed their stance so it's good now.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X