9:11 a.m.
Having a boot splash screen would also provide a complete desktop
experience.
On 2020-03-21 05:14 PM, Stefano Trevisani wrote:
On my notebook Clear Linux takes from 2 to 5 seconds
to boot, I don't
think
that's such a big deal... Though having a boot screen would be cool.
Il sab 21 mar 2020, 05:51 Mayuresh Kathe <mayuresh(a)kathe.in> ha
scritto:
I think the existing boot process is slow anyways
and during that
period
we have to see all the ugliness of the boot messages.
Would Auk Kok please reconsider (a previously closed) request #805 by
a
certain "xRiot" to include Plymouth for displaying a splash screen?
I agree that Plymouth might slow down the boot process a bit more, but
from a desktop Linux perspective, it would be a huge deal to not force
users to see boot messages unless they want to.
~Mayuresh
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)lists.clearlinux.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)lists.clearlinux.org
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)lists.clearlinux.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)lists.clearlinux.org 
2:22 a.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On 3/21/20 6:11 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
Having a boot splash screen would also provide a
complete desktop
experience.
Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with ClearLinux OS.
There are folks who are starting to experiment with the 3rd party
software stack. I strongly encourage you to consider that sort of
approach here.
Auke
3:58 a.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On 2020-03-22 11:52 AM, Auke Kok wrote:
On 3/21/20 6:11 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
i don't see why intel would chose the full gnome desktop with gdm if
clear linux os desktop didn't have consider providing a complete desktop
experience as within their scope in the first place. you would have less
headaches and better performance with "windowmaker".
Having a boot splash screen would also provide a
complete desktop
experience.
Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with ClearLinux
OS. There are folks who are starting to experiment with
the 3rd party
software stack. I strongly encourage you to consider that sort of
approach here.
are you going to provide space on your auto-updating repository for
those 3rd party software stacks?
i for one would be reluctant to have the whole c/c++ development
environment on my system just get plymouth compiled and installed over
and over again.
all i need is the binutils bundle, because i only work with assembler
using "as" and "ld" as my primary tools.
just that gnu "ed" is horribly broken, otherwise i would have no use for
"vi/vim" either.
~mayuresh
1:32 p.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On 3/22/20 12:58 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
I guess this is the core point: we can try to explain what we do, but,
it's virtually impossible to (1) get everyone to understand it, and
worse, (2) get everyone to agree with it.
I guess you can say that "packaging gnome/gdm" is, in your view, a
commitment to "providing a complete desktop experience". In our view, it
is not.
Auke
Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with ClearLinux
OS.
i don't see why intel would chose the full gnome desktop with gdm if
clear linux os desktop didn't have consider providing a complete
desktop experience as within their scope in the first place. 
3:58 p.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On 3/22/2020 10:32 AM, Auke Kok wrote:
On 3/22/20 12:58 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
I guess this is the core point: we can try to explain what we do, but, it's virtually
impossible to (1) get everyone to understand it, and worse, (2) get everyone to agree
with it.
I guess you can say that "packaging gnome/gdm" is, in your view, a commitment
to "providing a complete desktop experience". In our view, it is not.
the emphasize this, as I wrote in my first response to you a few days ago, we are aiming
at developers not general users.
part of that is that we know there will be rough edges, and that's reality.
super smooth boot experience at the expense of faster boot is one of those tradeoffs.
developers (especially kernel developers) tend to prefer a much faster boot
over a more pretty boot.
Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with ClearLinux OS.
i don't see why intel would chose the full gnome desktop with gdm if clear linux os
desktop didn't have consider providing a complete desktop experience as within their
scope in the first place. 
4 p.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
+1 on the faster boot over cool boot.
Il dom 22 mar 2020, 20:58 Arjan van de Ven <arjan(a)linux.intel.com> ha
scritto:
On 3/22/2020 10:32 AM, Auke Kok wrote:
>
i don't see why intel would chose the full gnome desktop with gdm if clear
linux os desktop didn't have consider providing a complete desktop
experience as within their
it's
virtually impossible to (1) get everyone to understand it, and worse,
(2) get everyone to agree
the emphasize this, as I wrote in my first response to you a few days ago,
we are aiming at developers not general users.
part of that is that we know there will be rough edges, and that's reality.
super smooth boot experience at the expense of faster boot is one of those
tradeoffs. developers (especially kernel developers) tend to prefer a much
faster boot
over a more pretty boot.
On 3/22/20 12:58 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
>>
>> Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with ClearLinux
OS.
scope in
the first place.
I guess this is the core point: we can try to explain what we do, but, with it.
I guess you can say that "packaging gnome/gdm" is, in your view, a
commitment to "providing a complete desktop experience". In our view, it is
not.
2:40 a.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On 2020-03-23 01:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On 3/22/2020 10:32 AM, Auke Kok wrote:
i think you are getting confused by being unreasonably tangential.
if you were (as you say) really aiming at developers instead of general
users, you definitely "would not" have chosen to run with 'gnome' and
'gdm' as the defaults.
real developers don't need the flash and pizzazz of a full desktop
environment, just those developers who are wimpy snowflakes do.
but then, you are as i'd mentioned getting confused between which set of
developers to target.
On 3/22/20 12:58 AM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
I guess this is the core point: we can try to explain what we do, but,
it's virtually impossible to (1) get everyone to understand it, and
worse, (2) get everyone to agree with it.
I guess you can say that "packaging gnome/gdm" is, in your view, a
commitment to "providing a complete desktop experience". In our view,
it is not.
the emphasize this, as I wrote in my first response to you a few days
ago, we are aiming at developers not general users.
part of that is that we know there will be rough edges, and that's
reality.
Which is outside the scope of what we're trying to do with
ClearLinux OS.
i don't see why intel would chose the full gnome desktop with gdm if
clear linux os desktop didn't have consider providing a complete
desktop experience as within their scope in the first place. super smooth boot experience at the expense of faster
boot is one of
those tradeoffs. developers (especially kernel developers) tend to
prefer a much faster boot
over a more pretty boot.
seriously!
are you really targeting kernel developers?
be honest, if not to us (in public), to yourself (in private), and do
that while staring at your own face in a mirror.
you are as i'd mentioned in a previous email, just "showing-off" a toy
project and creating a lot of buzz around it.
i bet the costs associated with this project would amount to
loose-change from the pockets of intel, no wonder you are doing a
half-baked job.
i think am going to stick with ubuntu.
they are really clear about what they are doing and they deliver on
their promise.
i just hope canonical pulls-in your optimisation techniques and beats
the pants off your "toy project".
goodbye,
~mayuresh
5:55 p.m.
New subject: Requesting a reconsideration for including Plymouth for desktop
On Monday, 23 March 2020 03:40:07 -03 Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
i just hope canonical pulls-in your optimisation
techniques and beats
the pants off your "toy project".
We'd be very glad for them to pull the optimisations. We've been trying to get
Canonical, SUSE and Red Hat to do that for years.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel System Software Products
1088
days inactive
1103
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Arjan van de Ven -
Auke Kok -
Mayuresh Kathe -
Stefano Trevisani -
Thiago Macieira