Crysstalis

15 ms·

91.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>I also want it to not take over my machine like systemd did. You will not have this without changing the kernel itself, /sbin/init needs to run as the root process of all other processes on the machine. By design, any implemen
92.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
The cold brutal truth is that open source developers need jobs too. That has always been the case. >You might as well put binary blobs in a GitHub repo and call it 'open-source' But this has not happened. >and have telemetry
93.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
That all is a lot of nonsense, this is an instance of Microsoft paying an open source developer to maintain open source. Yes, they actually do that sometimes.
94.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I don't know how you can't notice it when doing video editing, you have to actively notice the frame rate to do it right. Any choppiness will be evident. Also I really don't understand your second paragraph. You can't
95.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I don't know how that could be possible, I find tearing to be incredibly noticeable when doing video editing. If you're getting it when trying to do transfers between frame rates it will potentially screw things up, because you&#x
96.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
Have you ever seen a film or a TV show that had screen tearing in it? I haven't, it would look awful. For anything that needs to animate smoothly at a stable frame rate, tearing is a bug. It makes it look really choppy. You can do vari
97.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
The Wayland developers do this because they absolutely do not want to be involved in the perpetual fights between desktops. Getting into that is a lose-lose proposition. So they focus only on the small subset of things that every desktop ag
98.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>do you really expect frustrated end users to drop everything else going on in their life and spend weeks learning the ropes of this shit Are you sure you're responding to the correct post? I didn't say anything remotely like t
99.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I don't know what you mean intentional. The problem is that you feel pressured to use it, no? Well it seems that pressure comes mostly from its popularity, or you would be using something else.
100.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
To make any further investigation, you would have to share the error message.
101.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
It's not really a "fiat". There just aren't any GNOME developers left that are interested in maintaining the X11 parts of the stack. The Mutter developers are actively working on making the remaining X11 parts optional.
102.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
GtkPlug was a pretty busted API that only ever worked on X11, and even then it didn't totally work right. To make it work on other platforms (or allow users to implement it themselves) would require exposing so many hooks in the toolki
103.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>The GTK developers have stated that GTK now exists for GNOME. I don't know where you heard this, but it's not at all true. This is actually the complete opposite of what they did in GTK4. A lot of the features that were remove
104.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
That issue really could be anything, it could be something you did like putting some credentials in X-specific config files, or it could be SMPlayer looking for some X configuration that isn't there...
105.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I don't think those people with legacy systems running on X11 will pick Linux at all. They will probably use XQuartz, or one of the many X servers that runs on Windows. BSD may even work for them. The only reason to use Linux is for de
106.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I think that is the terminal reason for your complaint, if it was unpopular we probably also wouldn't even be talking about this.
107.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>I'm told it's creepy to point that out. But those are some of the cases that gave redhat this reputation. Yes, I think it is creepy. Don't you think it would be creepy if someone was in a completely different thread in a
108.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>Correct. I prefer having those 1.6 gigabytes of dependencies handled with the rest of my system packages, rather than having them fragmented across separate package managers. Well now this is different from what you said before. If you
109.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>I've heard this argument many times though, and it has failed again and again I am not speaking of you personally, this is in terms of distros as a whole. It has definitely not failed there, they will drop these packages when they
110.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
Putting this in a separate comment thread to avoid filling up the other one. I have some extra time so I read your blog post and wrote some comments. There is very little in there that is any kind of actionable issue. >Sure, you can pipe
111.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
No, that is very wrong. GNOME can be used on it if you use elogind. Truthfully, they will not adopt OpenRC because OpenRC is not at all comparable to systemd.
112.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>I can point to multiple specific instances where gnome developers were rude, unhelpful, arrogant, etc I too can point to multiple specific instances where Linux developers were rude, or where gcc developers were rude, or where SDL devel
113.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>It's a combo of 1) disagreeing with their choices and methods, and 2) the fact that those choices and methods have made his stuff much harder to avoid than the alternatives. That doesn't follow unless you consider "develo
114.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
>Not really. "In the past" we could write hermetic packaging for our software so it doesn't break, but GNOME decided not to do that (despite the fact that Hurd and Nix both provide sane jumping-off points). They chose inst
115.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
I still don't know what point you're trying to make though. To me this is like if you said "in a hypothetical sense planes are fine because you can buy a private jet, but in practice it's a pain because you know I have t
116.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
For one, your timeline is way off. Within the time period of GTK2 and GTK3 that would be more like Linux kernel v2.6 and v3.19. Yes there are still some projects I know of using these, but for the most part they're not viable, certainl
117.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
That looks like a bug, if you really have a need to do that you should report it.
118.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
It's very trivial to bypass those: just delete the packages off your system. Of course this means your system now won't boot, and you must expend effort to deploy a replacement. That's the actual non-trivial part. There'
119.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
Have you by chance checked the bug tracker, or reported this bug, or attempted to do any debugging to find the root cause?
120.
by Crysstalis 4y ago
Computer users are continually upset about a lot of things. That's just the way it is. If you work in the industry then that should make you happy, it means you will always be employed.

More ›