I think there could be two distinct sets of criteria:
1. criteria for the premier desktop to suit most users - it's
counter-productive for portability to be a major factor in this
2. criteria for the next-best desktop where 1. isn't practical -
portability, versatility and media size are much m
On 11/09/14 19:26, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 06:11:22PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> Fair enough if a Debian desktop doesn't want to support "toy
>> architectures" (I don't mind use of this term).
>
> So you call all but two[1] of Debian architectures (14+9) "toys"[2]?
> So it looks like gnome3 is the only one that doesn't work on most
> architectures.
You tested qemu, not real hardware.
For your tests to be really meaningful, they would have to be done on
actual hardware.
That said, I don't see a good reason why availability on architectures
should be a decidi
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:36:18PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> I just re-checked on powerpc in qemu, unlike my other setups it's not a real
> machine, but qemu is at least a reproducible setup without out-of-archive
> bits like all three of my armhf rigs.
> I'd say you'd need 'availability' or '
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 06:11:22PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 11/09/14 16:36, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >> What happens otherwise if trying to start GNOME3 (or others)?
> >> * without 3D, with llvmpipe
> >> * without both
> >
> > llvmpipe doesn't work at all -- not ported to -- on !x86 !ar
On 11/09/14 16:36, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> What happens otherwise if trying to start GNOME3 (or others)?
>> * without 3D, with llvmpipe
>> * without both
>
> llvmpipe doesn't work at all -- not ported to -- on !x86 !armhf.
>
>> Does it fall back gracefully to a fallback/flashback mode, and does t
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:56:58AM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 10/09/14 07:40, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > I think the "DebianDesktop requalification" table lacks an important
> > row: the availability of the desktop environment in question on all
> > Debian architectures.
>
> Not everyone
Quoting Joey Hess (jo...@debian.org):
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> > I think the "DebianDesktop requalification" table lacks an important
> > row: the availability of the desktop environment in question on all
> > Debian architectures.
>
> While that can be a minor consideration (it would be nicest to
Adam Borowski wrote:
> I think the "DebianDesktop requalification" table lacks an important
> row: the availability of the desktop environment in question on all
> Debian architectures.
While that can be a minor consideration (it would be nicest to be
consistent if possible), we've had different d
Steven Chamberlain, le Wed 10 Sep 2014 11:56:58 +0100, a écrit :
> What happens otherwise if trying to start GNOME3 (or others)?
> * without 3D, with llvmpipe
> * without both
>
> Does it fall back gracefully to a fallback/flashback mode, and does that
> still work these days? In this mode would
On 10/09/14 07:40, Adam Borowski wrote:
> I think the "DebianDesktop requalification" table lacks an important
> row: the availability of the desktop environment in question on all
> Debian architectures.
Not everyone has been persuaded on that principle yet :P But on
kfreebsd CDs we can at least
Hi!
I think the "DebianDesktop requalification" table lacks an important
row: the availability of the desktop environment in question on all
Debian architectures.
This is mainly an argument against gnome3, as it's restricted basically
to just amd64, i386 and armhf (poorly):
* systemd is not avail
12 matches
Mail list logo
