PDA

View Full Version : GNOME Shell 3.1.90 & Mutter 3.1.90


tox
30th August 2011, 01:13 AM
While there are many substantial features in this release, it's
particular worth pointing out the changes contributed by our
Summer of Code Students: Nohemi Fernandez's onscreen keyboard,
Morten Mjelva's contact search, and Neha Doijode's work on
getting cover art and other images to display in notifications.

Read More about it Here (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-announce-list/2011-August/msg00038.html)

There's several long-requested features in this release:
larger draggable borders on windows, antialiasing on rounded window
corners, and unredirection of full-screen 3D games for maximum
performance. Thanks to Jasper and Adel for this work! Read More About it Here (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-announce-list/2011-August/msg00037.html)

jpollard
30th August 2011, 01:21 AM
How about more compatibility with older hardware, and not requiring vendor drivers...

tox
30th August 2011, 01:24 AM
i guess thats the way of the future ( Desktop wise ) im sure KDE5 will probably go the same way

jpollard
30th August 2011, 01:39 AM
i guess thats the way of the future ( Desktop wise ) im sure KDE5 will probably go the same way

What, MORE proprietary drivers required before you can even install?

I think the legal department better put a rein on the developers.

tox
30th August 2011, 01:47 AM
What, MORE proprietary drivers required before you can even install?

I think the legal department better put a rein on the developers.

seems to work fine for me without blob or the need for blobbed drivers

ElderSnake
30th August 2011, 02:22 AM
I really really like the "[..]unredirection of full-screen 3D games for maximum
performance."

I've been wondering about that for a while and I'm glad they're doing something about it.

AdamW
30th August 2011, 05:55 AM
jpollard: there is no requirement for proprietary drivers. For a start, GNOME Shell works very well with the free drivers included in Fedora on a fairly large majority of graphics adapters. On these on which it does not work, GNOME 3 has a full fallback mode which kicks in. There are also three (more, actually) other desktops available as part of Fedora which do not require compositing support, and obviously the installer itself does not. It's just not accurate from any perspective to suggest that GNOME or Fedora requires proprietary drivers. Fedora would not tolerate such a situation.

There are probably a very few chipsets on which Shell ought to work with free drivers - so it tries to run - but fails. These are simply *bugs* - nothing sinister about it. Bugs have always happened; when you see one, report it, and it should get fixed. But it's not useful to extrapolate from a very small set of bugs to a general conclusion ("Fedora requires proprietary drivers"). It's simply not the case.

jpollard
30th August 2011, 01:14 PM
There are just too many reports of it failing without the proprietary drivers.

Bugs they may be. But it still is requiring proprietary drivers.

And it is just not useful.


Sorry that last wasn't quite clear.

Normal testing (for me, and others I have worked with) is to first boot the new system in a VM.
Ooops. Not supported. Known problem, apparently not being worked on. Use virtualbox or VMware. Fallback? sort of. At least until something else fails (like networking - that got me, some update damaged bind, and I haven't identified quite what the failure is. bridging isn't very well supported anymore. Now I need to reinstall the VM and see what happens. Not a problem, I expect that with alpha release quality software.

But this means none of the developers bothered to verify compatibility with even basic functioning in a VM before release, or they ignored it.
Do many FOSS drivers work? some. a good number of nvidia cards seem to fail, or fail at some time after seeming to work.
Bugs - yes. Fixes ? some. In the 5 months since F15 came out I would have expected these to be working. The usual fix is "get the proprietary driver".

Is it the fault of the Fedora developers? Not especially. This is a Gnome3 problem.

I still think Gnome2 should be available (in /opt if necessary) as a depreciated alternate for those that have little to no luck with Gnome 3.

AdamW
31st August 2011, 12:14 AM
"There are just too many reports of it failing without the proprietary drivers."

Define 'too many'. It's hardly an objective line. We at least tried to be systematic about it:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-02-22_Nouveau
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-02-23_Radeon
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-02-24_Intel
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-02-03_GNOME3_Alpha
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-10_GNOME3_Beta
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-04-21_GNOME3_Final

no less than six test events which involved extensive testing of GNOME 3 on various video hardware; overall Shell was successful on something like 85% of all systems, and fallback mode correctly kicked in on almost all the remainder. We were definitely under 5% for 'Shell doesn't work and fallback doesn't kick in'.

"But it still is requiring proprietary drivers."

No, it isn't, because there is fallback mode, and choice of desktops.

"Normal testing (for me, and others I have worked with) is to first boot the new system in a VM.
Ooops. Not supported. Known problem, apparently not being worked on."

Not true: there are people working on it from both ends, both to make Shell work with software rendering, and to implement 3D passthrough in KVM / Spice.

"Fallback? sort of. At least until something else fails (like networking"

Well - how is a networking problem anything at all to do with this? You admit that fallback mode loads up and works, so what's the problem? I don't see how 'I had a networking problem while I happened to be running in fallback mode' somehow substantiates your argument that GNOME 3 requires accelerated hardware, it doesn't seem at all relevant.

"But this means none of the developers bothered to verify compatibility with even basic functioning in a VM before release, or they ignored it."

No, it doesn't really mean that. We run F16 in VMs all the time. I probably booted it up over 200 times in a VM during Alpha testing just myself. Fedora and GNOME are both entirely aware that Shell doesn't run in a qemu/KVM VM, and this is well documented. Fallback mode is considered a perfectly acceptable interface for use in a VM. Indeed, the virtualization use case is one of the main drivers for fallback mode development.

jpollard
31st August 2011, 03:42 AM
Have you bothered to test systemd with broken routing? Specifically the one where ACKs are dropped? (The three way TCP handshake is broken).

I grant that one is difficult to set up (I haven't managed it yet, I think it takes 2 routers to do it, or maybe two network interfaces where the request comes in the first, but the replies go out the second, but the client isn't connected to the second interface - and the break should be in the router not the server).

Too many "black screens" with Gnome3. Too much interdependence for reliability. Too many "required services" before it starts working.

Why should it make a difference if dbus isn't working or has a problem? Why should it make a difference if pulse audio isn't present?
Why should it make a difference if there is only 512MB of memory? (there is a workaround, but fix? no, it is still there the last time I checked).

Are things getting better... in some ways.

There are now a number of additional packages that have to be added just to get near the functionality of Gnome2.

Is Gnome 3 as easy to use as Gnome 2? No.

A number of workarounds have been identified - are they fixes? no. they are workarounds to quiet the complaints.

This is NOT the way to win friends and influence businesses.

Are all the problems Gnome3 problems - Nope. Some are because of other surprisingly drastic changes in Fedora 15. But running into them makes it hard to identify whether a particular problem is gnome 3, hardware, or just Fedora 15.

Is the missing functionality the fault of Gnome3 or Fedora 15? Can't tell. It could be. The Gnome3 project could have expected that integration into a distribution would be done by the distribution developers. Any missing functionality would then be the responsibility of the distribution developers. Hence, a lot of complaining.

And I'm not that vocal. Up until Fedora 15, I had no real problem with Fedora. Having both Gnome3 AND systemd problems at the same time is just too much revolution in a distribution.

I can easily see why a number of people are skipping it.

Hopefully, Fedora 16 will have a lot of these problems fixed. Fedora 15 seems to be a lost cause.

expectATIon
31st August 2011, 07:56 PM
I'm running Fedora15. How can I install gnome-shell 3.1.90?

Thanks

bruce89
2nd September 2011, 12:05 AM
I'm running Fedora15. How can I install gnome-shell 3.1.90

Probably the easiest way (but probably not a hugely good idea if you need a stable desktop) is to upgrade to F16.

Failing that, you can build it yourself following http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell#Building (takes a long time, and a lot of fetching stuff off GNOME git).

tox
2nd September 2011, 12:37 AM
I'm running Fedora15. How can I install gnome-shell 3.1.90?

Thanks

bit of a dumb question when one should know " how to get 3.1.90 " AdamW has made thread and so have i with the F16 Alpha Links and the F16 TC1 Beta Links in this sub-forum. look before posting. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading

but if you want a stable Release, stay with F15 till the official F16 Beta comes out

Richards Bay - Bhogpur Photos on Instagram - Islington Photos