On 9/23/19 12:55 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:49 PM Ty Young <youngty1997@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/23/19 9:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 11:03 PM Ty Young <youngty1997@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/22/19 9:09 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 7:25 PM Ty Young <youngty1997@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/22/19 5:51 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 9/22/19 3:10 PM, Ty Young wrote:
I couldn't actually install the drivers because the update GUI in the
cinnamon spin is broken and/or the repo/update servers are down. Again.
I don't know why you're having so much trouble with updates. But just
in case you're referring to rpmfusion as you have in other emails, I
hope you're aware that Redhat has nothing to do with them. They are
an independent third-party repo not managed by Fedora. They host
packages that can't, for various reasons, be distributed by Fedora.
No, I meant the package manager GUI front-end won't work:
https://imgur.com/a/Dajf28T
I'm sorry that dnfdragora isn't quite working properly on your system.
As one of the developers of dnfdragora and dnfdaemon, I'm aware of
some of those quirks, and myself and the other developer have been
trying to work on fixing these problems. It's difficult though, as
both of us are working on it in our spare time. We're committed to
improving it, but I have to find time for it, among everything else.
If you'd like to help, we'd appreciate it. The project is here:
https://github.com/manatools/dnfdragora
It's fine, I completely understand. I just happened to pick the Cinnamon
spin since I knew it and MATE used LightDM and I don't use Fedora so I
don't know if I can be of any help.
Also, Spanish(?) confirm prompt when rest of GUI is English:
https://imgur.com/a/7ashccO
...and proof X.Org on Cinnamon is running as root:
https://imgur.com/a/UcLjjKT
Yet on Gnome Fedora it isn't:
https://imgur.com/a/DlXwcdK
So is Fedora going to admit it's a bug in Gnome Fedora or are we going
to keep being salty that Nvidia doesn't support or have an Open Source
driver by pointing the finger at them? Actually fixing the bug would be
the more productive option here.
Well, the rootless X thing is from gnome-session down, so that's a
GNOME thing. I'm aware that not all DEs do this, the work was
primarily done in GNOME.
How would you propose we fix this bug, as you call it?
Well, what exactly was the old behavior before? I know for a fact X. Org
was running as root during the beta. Is X. Org as root during beta
periods only the norm?
Neither of the two other major distro families, Arch Linux and Ubuntu
with Gnome, have X. Org as root disabled, at least not when running the
Nvidia binary. Are there any malicious software that even exists that
exploit X. Org being ran as root? If no one else sees that as an issue
then why does Fedora? And is disabling root X. Org worth breaking
people's software that would otherwise work?
Clearly few DM(s) other than Gnome supports it despite earlier claims,
so it isn't even standard behavior. Fedora supports multiple spins
including DM(s) that don't support it, so you're just fragmenting your
own ecosystem if it is enabled on Gnome Fedora only. That's not a great
idea.
So, IMO, the correct behavior here would be to disable until at least
other DM(s) support it and other distros enabled it by default so that
Fedora is at least following standards. Once it *actually* gets adopted
*maybe* Nvidia will allow overclocking on non root X. Org but that could
just be wishful thinking. At minimum there should always be an option to
disable security features, especially if it results in performance
loss(e.g. Specter) or, in this case, application compatibility problems
easily... and editing a config file isn't that easy, obvious, or in some
cases even safe.
The problem with that is that if we did it that way, nobody would
adapt to the change. Much in the same manner that we're moving to
cgroups v2 in Fedora 31, if we didn't do it, we can't suss out
breakages and fix them (if possible). And if third parties that don't
keep up with these changes (especially one that happened in 2013 for
Fedora GNOME!), there's not much that can be done.
Fedora is not Linux. You are not the sole arbiters of what gets changed
in the Linux ecosystem. You all need to get that through your damn
heads. No other distro/DE besides Gnome supports this and it doesn't
look like that's ever going to change.
We are not, sure. But the Fedora distribution is allowed to have the
opinion to do new things and see how it goes.
How it went was awful. No other distro/DE supported it and it breaks
user applications.
Each of the spins are
allowed to work towards implementing this whenever they want. I
suspect at this point we're mostly waiting to move to Wayland on the
spins rather than doing work on Xorg stuff.
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, really? Wayland doesn't even
work on a large selection of hardware(Nvidia) and has many missing
features deemed to be vital for some people which X. Org does have. This
has been a common criticism of Wayland and every advocates and
developers put their fingers in their ears and ignore it. People are
just going to continue to use X. Org, if this is they way you're going
to do things, you realize?
The ONLY reason Plymouth(from my understanding, a Fedora initiative) and
Flicker Free boot was/is being adopted by other distros is because
Fedora did the work for them. Since Fedora isn't putting in the work to
ensure DEs on their own distro support it, no one cares and won't adopt
it universally.
This is often why a lot of things Fedora does gets broadly adopted. We
do all the work to suss it out and everyone else benefits.
You do all the work and they seemingly contribute little. Whatever, if
you're happy with that relationship that's on you.
However, not everything Fedora/Gnome does gets adopted by other Linux
distros/DEs. This is one of those cases. Worse yet, your own spins
can't/don't support it, resulting in in-distro fragmentation that
developers have to cope with.
And hey, all of those DEs are Open Source. It's almost like being Open
Source doesn't increase the rate that something gets fixed. Imagine that.
Of course it doesn't, but it adds an opportunity for anyone to come in
and do things. If someone is interested in fixing this for other DEs,
they can at their leisure.
Maybe provide an optional rootless login session option in Gnome's login
screen?
Again, it doesn't force things to change in the ecosystem, and worse,
it makes it more difficult for QA and release verification, as we add
another codepath to everything by doing this.
YOU ARE ALREADY DOING THAT WITH YOUR SPINS! YOU ARE FRAGMENTING YOUR OWN
DISTRO FOR NO REASON! NO OTHER DE SUPPORTS THIS!
Dude, seriously, chill. The spins are managed by different groups of
people. Feel free to ask *them* why they haven't implemented the
feature yet.
Fedora isn't centrally managed by a small group of people, it's a
fairly broad community with a lot of folks working on their own
things.
You broke my software, blame Nvidia for something *YOU* did, fragmented
your own distro ecosystem which is already in a poor state, and refuse
to fix it. I have every right to be upset.
They are *Fedora* spins. They are supposed to only be different in DE
ecosystems, not commonly shared dependency software like X. Org, are
they not? If you're not even going to ensure compatibility in your own
distro you might as well not call them "spins" but "derivatives".
FWIW, even if the application uses Flatpak, rootless X. Org still breaks
the application. Would it be possible to grant individual applications
privileged root access on a case by case basis?
That's a Flatpak/Flathub thing, not really under our control unfortunately.
No, it has nothing to do with Flatpak. The point was that Flatpak
applications are still dependent on host X. Org and are susceptible to
stupid crap that distros do, like this, despite supposedly being distro
independent.
Flatpaks run on your computer, they're susceptible to anything you do too.
Also while I'm at it, why does Gnome Screenshot in Fedora have a menu to
the left of the cancel button but Arch doesn't? Bit odd.
Maybe different versions of the software positioned it differently?
Ah, no. The menu I'm talking looks like the application icon itself.
I've only seen it manifest itself in Arch Linux when you install another
DE. No other Gnome applications in Fedora that I could see has it, and
it does stick out... maybe it's a CSD compatibility thing for Cinnomon
and/or Mate?
Ah, that's very possible. GTK+ has odd behaviors depending on desktop
environment.
...but it happens on a pure Gnome Fedora and is the only Gnome
application to have it...
I dunno. I use KDE myself.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
