Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unity 8, Mir To Be Experimental Choice In Ubuntu 13.10

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

  • Unity 8, Mir To Be Experimental Choice In Ubuntu 13.10

    Phoronix: Unity 8, Mir To Be Experimental Choice In Ubuntu 13.10

    For those Linux enthusiasts wishing to toy with the Mir Display Server and Canonical's next-generation Unity 8 interface, they will be made optionally available for desktop users with the Ubuntu 13.10 release due out in October...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM3MzY

  • TheBlackCat
    replied
    Originally posted by dee. View Post
    If you take a shovel, and replace the handle, the shaft and the head, will it still be the same shovel? That's a question without an answer, because it depends on the viewpoint - if you consider this particular shovel to be the sum of its parts, then it ceases being the same shovel the moment you replace the first part. But if you consider the shovel to be the thing you use to dig holes, you could say that it never ceases being the same shovel, because no matter how many parts you replace, it will still be the "thing you use to dig holes".
    I don't think that really applies. The "purpose" is being a Linux distro. If it is changed to being 100% based off debian, it is still serving that purpose, but it would empirically false to call it a Ubuntu-based distro.

    I think a better analogy would be if you take a shovel of brand A, then replace the handle, shaft, and head with those made by brand B, would it still be a brand A shovel? At what point does it cease being a brand A shovel and start being a brand B shovel?

    Leave a comment:


  • Luke
    replied
    Ubuntu is based on Debian unstable

    Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    That depends on whether the Debian one is recent enough. If Debian is frozen that may not be an option.

    Further, how much of Ubuntu do they need to replace with Debian before they are no longer a Ubuntu-based distro at all?
    Ubuntu is based on Debian unstable as I recall. Has this been changd? As I recall, Debian testing is frozen sometime, but do they ever freeze unstable?

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    Further, how much of Ubuntu do they need to replace with Debian before they are no longer a Ubuntu-based distro at all?
    Alternatively, more than a half.

    Leave a comment:


  • dee.
    replied
    Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    That depends on whether the Debian one is recent enough. If Debian is frozen that may not be an option.

    Further, how much of Ubuntu do they need to replace with Debian before they are no longer a Ubuntu-based distro at all?
    Well, that's rather like the Ship of Theseus paradox...

    If you take a shovel, and replace the handle, the shaft and the head, will it still be the same shovel? That's a question without an answer, because it depends on the viewpoint - if you consider this particular shovel to be the sum of its parts, then it ceases being the same shovel the moment you replace the first part. But if you consider the shovel to be the thing you use to dig holes, you could say that it never ceases being the same shovel, because no matter how many parts you replace, it will still be the "thing you use to dig holes".

    Leave a comment:


  • TheBlackCat
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke View Post
    And any *buntu such as Kubuntu finding themselves locked out of the graphics stack could put all of their own packages, plus alternative/renamed versions of Mesa and X or Wayland pulled from Debian into Universe. If that won't work, they could include the necessary Debian repo directly in their own /etc/apt/sources.list, operating as a mixed system. Debian will already be having to mantain a graphics stack independant of Ubuntu, why do this twice?
    That depends on whether the Debian one is recent enough. If Debian is frozen that may not be an option.

    Further, how much of Ubuntu do they need to replace with Debian before they are no longer a Ubuntu-based distro at all?

    Leave a comment:


  • TheBlackCat
    replied
    Originally posted by Serge View Post
    But do you guys really think Canonical will want to re-write that low in the stack? I mean, don't they already have their hands full?
    They have to. No matter what Canonical needs to write and maintain the Mesa patches necessary to run Mir. If Mesa doesn't include these upstream, which I doubt they will, then Ubuntu will need to create and maintain them. If they are doing that they may remove the Wayland-related components, or they may not. We don't know at this point whether Canonical intends to support Wayland or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • pandev92
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    I'd rather see Unity on Wayland than on Mir.
    +1000

    would be wonderful

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    Wayland

    I'd rather see Unity on Wayland than on Mir.

    Leave a comment:


  • Serge
    replied
    Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    There is the question of their graphics stack. It has to support Wayland. If they patch it to only support Mir, then that would require the other *buntu groups to maintain their own stack.
    Originally posted by Luke View Post
    And any *buntu such as Kubuntu finding themselves locked out of the graphics stack could put all of their own packages, plus alternative/renamed versions of Mesa and X or Wayland pulled from Debian into Universe. If that won't work, they could include the necessary Debian repo directly in their own /etc/apt/sources.list, operating as a mixed system. Debian will already be having to mantain a graphics stack independant of Ubuntu, why do this twice?

    Would be necessary to set pin-priorities so the usable Ubuntu packages would not also be replaced by the Debian versions. Same for mint, etc: If the Ubuntu graphics stack conflicts with Wayland, with X, or with a needed driver, Debian's stack is out there. If for some reason even that runs into conflicts, rebasing on Debian is worst-case scenario. Mint, in fact, keeps their Debian-only based version around, I suspect for reasons of insurance.
    But do you guys really think Canonical will want to re-write that low in the stack? I mean, don't they already have their hands full?

    Then again, they already looked like they had their hands full five random in-house projects ago, so maybe they're willing to take on a bit more after all.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X