Hi,
The LAS reviewed F22 recently (the F22 review starts at about 1:07:00)[1]. They had quite a few good things to say and some suggestions on the issue that they ran into. Just forwarding them here FYI :)
Positives: - Ease of setting up on-line accounts etc - Notifications that tell you what you need but don't disturb you - Network captive portal that comes up automatically - Gnome software and the work done to make apps available in it - Focus that the rings approach brings - DNF works well - Improvements to anaconda - FedUp redesign works well (although I've read that fedup will be dropped from F23) - Server product defaults to XFS
Issues: - After login on the captive portal, no indication that you've been connected (he said his wife would've gotten stuck there, for example, since she'd assume the captive portal is the browser itself). Suggestion was that the captive portal closes once the user has logged in and connection to the internet established. - GDM Wayland on some Nvidia cards didn't work - documented on the common bugs page, though, with a workaround. - Global dark themes seem incomplete - text and text boxes are both black, so text can't be read easily - needs the user to tweak to fix.
[1] http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/83032/fedora-22-review-las-367/
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 09:54:41PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi,
The LAS reviewed F22 recently (the F22 review starts at about 1:07:00)[1]. They had quite a few good things to say and some suggestions on the issue that they ran into. Just forwarding them here FYI :)
Positives:
- Ease of setting up on-line accounts etc
- Notifications that tell you what you need but don't disturb you
- Network captive portal that comes up automatically
- Gnome software and the work done to make apps available in it
- Focus that the rings approach brings
- DNF works well
- Improvements to anaconda
- FedUp redesign works well (although I've read that fedup will be
dropped from F23)
- Server product defaults to XFS
Issues:
- After login on the captive portal, no indication that you've been
connected (he said his wife would've gotten stuck there, for example, since she'd assume the captive portal is the browser itself). Suggestion was that the captive portal closes once the user has logged in and connection to the internet established.
- GDM Wayland on some Nvidia cards didn't work - documented on the
common bugs page, though, with a workaround.
- Global dark themes seem incomplete - text and text boxes are both
black, so text can't be read easily - needs the user to tweak to fix.
[1] http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/83032/fedora-22-review-las-367/
Thanks for the summary, Ankur!
I listened to the majority of the review before I ran out of time. I wanted to point out that the tone of the reivew as overwhelmingly positive. This is a great testament to the work done upstream, as well as the integration done in Workstation.
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
hi I've watched both, and the jist seems to be something on the order of "well, fedora is nice, but it needs to make proprietary bits easier because people need them." I don't think I quite agree with that, for all sorts of reasons. It's why I switched to fedora, because it sticks to it's open source principals. Thanks Kendell clark
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
Hi Kendell,
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
People do want their hardware to work well, if they bought Nvidia they want to use it and nouveau doesn't quite cut it (no offence meant here, but the overall experience is not up to expectation for the average user). Speaking for myself now: I just got a Dell Alienware 15. It has an nvidia optimus system. The reason why I choose this system is because I want to play steam games on it and I want to play on Linux. Intel is great, I love it and I usually play with Intel when it works (the driver is improving dramatically and a lot of stuff just works nowadays), but for some game you need some extra push. So I got the nvidia driver from rpmfusion applied a very minor adjustment to make it play nice with bumblebee, got bumblebee and bbswitch SRPMs from ELrepo (yes that's right) and recompiled for Fedora. This is easy for me, for the average user is impossible.
If you are a free software purist I can understand this is disturbing, I'm the first one being so happy when I can just use the Intel open source driver. But the average computer user is not a free software purist. Giving the user the option to use proprietary drivers, but sticking to open one by default, doesn't mean the distro is not supporting free software. It means you are also supporting non free software and you give you users the choice.
That said I do agree proprietary stuff can stay in rpmfusion. It doesn't have to be in the official repo at all to be easy and available. A good start would be to include rpmfusion-*-release RPMs in fedora official repo and possibly doing something along the lines of the Ubuntu additional driver tool to switch between available drivers.
Best regards Enrico
[1] Unless I'm 100% sure they are not going to use nvidia ever and if it is a system I know it works well out of the box. Also note I'm not talking about fglrx here. I've been the maintainer of fglrx gentoo package for a couple of years and I know very well how painful it is. It would simply harm the Fedora graphic stack given how slow AMD is adding support to new Xorg and kernel release. So I'm not in favour of providing all proprietary drivers. If open source packages have to fulfil quality standards, that should be true for proprietary drivers as well.
On 4 June 2015 at 22:53, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
hi I've watched both, and the jist seems to be something on the order of "well, fedora is nice, but it needs to make proprietary bits easier because people need them." I don't think I quite agree with that, for all sorts of reasons. It's why I switched to fedora, because it sticks to it's open source principals. Thanks Kendell clark
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVcLqzAAoJEGYgJ5/kqBTdPdwQAJg7JcAbJ0B7NTQ7a5A3jTRw +/BhwXvl6k8y68ogc+zzRupj5QC8stASVeLF7v+N7ZeghkJr37eR5K5bK1UiteYQ g8v+QGIxBi55dT8OoDPb4rurnuvJmEx+gZvYndyeOPyAliBZb+s9AzIFK6gQ1rQJ qBCjWUFz003X4Zc2W2jTqMMUQh7+3J7lfAqX4BzYp89rB4sQdAs65acaUp8A+LDb Pq6Hj+M3g6OWyD5/qpK3fHbWiK0JYm+0keh9VQbr3CekuAW0C8YqqaO+kHPI67xh jn7PlOBgdURXbEghlmcsT/NRv2EPOljsmCf97gxzz0tIAt7gjWVB2N8szzX2XNDF quMCONYu5dpmdfl9S1qOg2D8ZQrQVQDPEo4LBz3619LV16K3iR164EJGLJgYLVOj HFZn4a1PG8IParEpUKXYR4OL9mYnLs14KSoTtg5pRlrnzzIK+iOF9r0jlax8/dPX zK1wivwFYo4e7G/kdze7rmF07uzgwnFCTjzGDkR9wK/FHoNw0anCWmXdInsLTraD CoD3EGNifKoVFuArqVCb8dkb+K3EDCnDN77rhxgi8g60265UUubwHJqB1up3N37Y 5XdXybSpA/XDA3My/rHPCIqT039IYfJoMQAJ9iuEwVlcFokCAkI7gdEvuFV6hclY ShRvqjK15pyenuQKmBSO =aG6n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
hi I'm no purist, but my main beef with that review, and it's a minor one, most of it was great is the fact that unless a proprietary driver is a click away and it "just works" the assumption is no one will use linux, and by extension, fedora. Fedora cannot and probably will not ever include proprietary drivers for graphics cards and such. Firmware is an exception, and I don't know how they manage this, but drivers are another story. I think part of the issue is also that the nvidia and ati proprietary drivers lag behind the latest kernel, so fedora would have to put extra effort into keeping them working, and they just don't want to, which I holeheartedly applaud. If you need proprietary drivers, by all means, get them, but don't knock fedora for not turning into ubuntu, please. Note that this is directed at the review, not at this last email. Thanks Kendell clark
Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
Hi Kendell,
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
People do want their hardware to work well, if they bought Nvidia they want to use it and nouveau doesn't quite cut it (no offence meant here, but the overall experience is not up to expectation for the average user). Speaking for myself now: I just got a Dell Alienware 15. It has an nvidia optimus system. The reason why I choose this system is because I want to play steam games on it and I want to play on Linux. Intel is great, I love it and I usually play with Intel when it works (the driver is improving dramatically and a lot of stuff just works nowadays), but for some game you need some extra push. So I got the nvidia driver from rpmfusion applied a very minor adjustment to make it play nice with bumblebee, got bumblebee and bbswitch SRPMs from ELrepo (yes that's right) and recompiled for Fedora. This is easy for me, for the average user is impossible.
If you are a free software purist I can understand this is disturbing, I'm the first one being so happy when I can just use the Intel open source driver. But the average computer user is not a free software purist. Giving the user the option to use proprietary drivers, but sticking to open one by default, doesn't mean the distro is not supporting free software. It means you are also supporting non free software and you give you users the choice.
That said I do agree proprietary stuff can stay in rpmfusion. It doesn't have to be in the official repo at all to be easy and available. A good start would be to include rpmfusion-*-release RPMs in fedora official repo and possibly doing something along the lines of the Ubuntu additional driver tool to switch between available drivers.
Best regards Enrico
[1] Unless I'm 100% sure they are not going to use nvidia ever and if it is a system I know it works well out of the box. Also note I'm not talking about fglrx here. I've been the maintainer of fglrx gentoo package for a couple of years and I know very well how painful it is. It would simply harm the Fedora graphic stack given how slow AMD is adding support to new Xorg and kernel release. So I'm not in favour of providing all proprietary drivers. If open source packages have to fulfil quality standards, that should be true for proprietary drivers as well.
On 4 June 2015 at 22:53, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote: hi I've watched both, and the jist seems to be something on the order of "well, fedora is nice, but it needs to make proprietary bits easier because people need them." I don't think I quite agree with that, for all sorts of reasons. It's why I switched to fedora, because it sticks to it's open source principals. Thanks Kendell clark
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
For sure I do very well agree with you with
"I think part of the issue is also that the nvidia and ati proprietary drivers lag behind the latest kernel, so fedora would have to put extra effort into keeping them working, and they just don't want to, which I holeheartedly applaud. If you need proprietary drivers, by all means, get them, but don't knock fedora for not turning into ubuntu, please."
That was not the point of my email at all, just want to make it clear :).
Best regards. Enrico
On 5 June 2015 at 10:46, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
hi I'm no purist, but my main beef with that review, and it's a minor one, most of it was great is the fact that unless a proprietary driver is a click away and it "just works" the assumption is no one will use linux, and by extension, fedora. Fedora cannot and probably will not ever include proprietary drivers for graphics cards and such. Firmware is an exception, and I don't know how they manage this, but drivers are another story. I think part of the issue is also that the nvidia and ati proprietary drivers lag behind the latest kernel, so fedora would have to put extra effort into keeping them working, and they just don't want to, which I holeheartedly applaud. If you need proprietary drivers, by all means, get them, but don't knock fedora for not turning into ubuntu, please. Note that this is directed at the review, not at this last email. Thanks Kendell clark
Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
Hi Kendell,
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
People do want their hardware to work well, if they bought Nvidia they want to use it and nouveau doesn't quite cut it (no offence meant here, but the overall experience is not up to expectation for the average user). Speaking for myself now: I just got a Dell Alienware 15. It has an nvidia optimus system. The reason why I choose this system is because I want to play steam games on it and I want to play on Linux. Intel is great, I love it and I usually play with Intel when it works (the driver is improving dramatically and a lot of stuff just works nowadays), but for some game you need some extra push. So I got the nvidia driver from rpmfusion applied a very minor adjustment to make it play nice with bumblebee, got bumblebee and bbswitch SRPMs from ELrepo (yes that's right) and recompiled for Fedora. This is easy for me, for the average user is impossible.
If you are a free software purist I can understand this is disturbing, I'm the first one being so happy when I can just use the Intel open source driver. But the average computer user is not a free software purist. Giving the user the option to use proprietary drivers, but sticking to open one by default, doesn't mean the distro is not supporting free software. It means you are also supporting non free software and you give you users the choice.
That said I do agree proprietary stuff can stay in rpmfusion. It doesn't have to be in the official repo at all to be easy and available. A good start would be to include rpmfusion-*-release RPMs in fedora official repo and possibly doing something along the lines of the Ubuntu additional driver tool to switch between available drivers.
Best regards Enrico
[1] Unless I'm 100% sure they are not going to use nvidia ever and if it is a system I know it works well out of the box. Also note I'm not talking about fglrx here. I've been the maintainer of fglrx gentoo package for a couple of years and I know very well how painful it is. It would simply harm the Fedora graphic stack given how slow AMD is adding support to new Xorg and kernel release. So I'm not in favour of providing all proprietary drivers. If open source packages have to fulfil quality standards, that should be true for proprietary drivers as well.
On 4 June 2015 at 22:53, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote: hi I've watched both, and the jist seems to be something on the order of "well, fedora is nice, but it needs to make proprietary bits easier because people need them." I don't think I quite agree with that, for all sorts of reasons. It's why I switched to fedora, because it sticks to it's open source principals. Thanks Kendell clark
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVcWHvAAoJEGYgJ5/kqBTdr2QP/i9gO/7UjAL/wNv36ZwsXmLv 115Pg80aXgVLyUc2ojZwhivBb4n/PCuilAQgN8Vg8pNtm/XIG7mfITrhH9PrJbCf cCRkbPVWqGYImmWPY9vyAAhGdgSdkmWS5PGUnv0q4xbhN48dyg2xmXta3CC1s4+1 hsScnQodpjT5VUJNjR/AwfgMbVYSuHY7aw4Qm9s56mSKfnoTWdoqTWO9V5gutwiI 7V3cUTNh69J5vhu0tJVlQTE7cv9+Ua8vPOzsPjLjv8ltCRY5hAQh0/yzuiIJANRl eoaCMUXb+nmOBPbGpN7k+dx4o59ts3eISO9eXbkBB7zOtlxLFEceE+ZBXe9T6P2u MjJBrujOb62c3XGsifIjRFa5XaFLrpBBMDT6H701RbOE1OEaeIBD3SIZOGMO9BKK n2cbcibdK2uB1VVNAGiXd58xyXNFmnkRdvj06m2Qj/3qC0DD2bllpUS5GKlNlLVe fe6/6o8wYuWun3FLcQjMBDAy84MbacBb7BdQS9VN7wU4Uqb9y7s/hfdNeWvnLVvU KPU6loPGPhHp6YmXPr/NMeyLacZz+uhJMOXbgJcUgFwc+5agr75gpf3AIxM+rG5W VwcVnpobrloJeuCIC/KCeQmIhCFgKa6SH1wXpKy7rbT597z2FceH/ghl75vugw6N VHpgDTw3/jn6FbYbU07t =BUIV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
Ah, gotcha. I should've been a lot clearer, but it was late lol. My comments were directed at the review on las, not your email. Most of it was great, there was just the bit about proprietary drivers and fonts I didn't quite like. Thanks Kendell clark
Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
For sure I do very well agree with you with
"I think part of the issue is also that the nvidia and ati proprietary drivers lag behind the latest kernel, so fedora would have to put extra effort into keeping them working, and they just don't want to, which I holeheartedly applaud. If you need proprietary drivers, by all means, get them, but don't knock fedora for not turning into ubuntu, please."
That was not the point of my email at all, just want to make it clear :).
Best regards. Enrico
On 5 June 2015 at 10:46, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote: hi I'm no purist, but my main beef with that review, and it's a minor one, most of it was great is the fact that unless a proprietary driver is a click away and it "just works" the assumption is no one will use linux, and by extension, fedora. Fedora cannot and probably will not ever include proprietary drivers for graphics cards and such. Firmware is an exception, and I don't know how they manage this, but drivers are another story. I think part of the issue is also that the nvidia and ati proprietary drivers lag behind the latest kernel, so fedora would have to put extra effort into keeping them working, and they just don't want to, which I holeheartedly applaud. If you need proprietary drivers, by all means, get them, but don't knock fedora for not turning into ubuntu, please. Note that this is directed at the review, not at this last email. Thanks Kendell clark
Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
Hi Kendell,
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
People do want their hardware to work well, if they bought Nvidia they want to use it and nouveau doesn't quite cut it (no offence meant here, but the overall experience is not up to expectation for the average user). Speaking for myself now: I just got a Dell Alienware 15. It has an nvidia optimus system. The reason why I choose this system is because I want to play steam games on it and I want to play on Linux. Intel is great, I love it and I usually play with Intel when it works (the driver is improving dramatically and a lot of stuff just works nowadays), but for some game you need some extra push. So I got the nvidia driver from rpmfusion applied a very minor adjustment to make it play nice with bumblebee, got bumblebee and bbswitch SRPMs from ELrepo (yes that's right) and recompiled for Fedora. This is easy for me, for the average user is impossible.
If you are a free software purist I can understand this is disturbing, I'm the first one being so happy when I can just use the Intel open source driver. But the average computer user is not a free software purist. Giving the user the option to use proprietary drivers, but sticking to open one by default, doesn't mean the distro is not supporting free software. It means you are also supporting non free software and you give you users the choice.
That said I do agree proprietary stuff can stay in rpmfusion. It doesn't have to be in the official repo at all to be easy and available. A good start would be to include rpmfusion-*-release RPMs in fedora official repo and possibly doing something along the lines of the Ubuntu additional driver tool to switch between available drivers.
Best regards Enrico
[1] Unless I'm 100% sure they are not going to use nvidia ever and if it is a system I know it works well out of the box. Also note I'm not talking about fglrx here. I've been the maintainer of fglrx gentoo package for a couple of years and I know very well how painful it is. It would simply harm the Fedora graphic stack given how slow AMD is adding support to new Xorg and kernel release. So I'm not in favour of providing all proprietary drivers. If open source packages have to fulfil quality standards, that should be true for proprietary drivers as well.
On 4 June 2015 at 22:53, kendell clark coffeekingms@gmail.com wrote: hi I've watched both, and the jist seems to be something on the order of "well, fedora is nice, but it needs to make proprietary bits easier because people need them." I don't think I quite agree with that, for all sorts of reasons. It's why I switched to fedora, because it sticks to it's open source principals. Thanks Kendell clark
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> They have a follow-up review here: > http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 > 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/ > > I haven't watched it yet. >
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
On 05/06/15 01:41 AM, Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
[1] Unless I'm 100% sure they are not going to use nvidia ever and if it is a system I know it works well out of the box. Also note I'm not talking about fglrx here. I've been the maintainer of fglrx gentoo package for a couple of years and I know very well how painful it is. It would simply harm the Fedora graphic stack given how slow AMD is adding support to new Xorg and kernel release. So I'm not in favour of providing all proprietary drivers. If open source packages have to fulfil quality standards, that should be true for proprietary drivers as well.
AMDGPU is AMD attempt at solving driver issue for newer hardware. The company recently assigned ten people on working on that stack combining both open source and proprietary driver if applicable without tainting the kernel
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Enrico Tagliavini < enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com> wrote:
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
RPM Fusion support for Nvidia seems OK, but support for Catalyst/fglrx has been nonexistent in Fedora 20-22.
My hardware (2013 HP laptop) eventually "aged out" of needing fglrx/Catalyst, and running the open Radeon is less trouble, for sure. But for new hardware, it's sure nice to have Catalyst (and I presume Nvidia) around and packaged.
But I've accepted that the Fedora Project doesn't want proprietary graphics drivers in its archive, and would really (really, really) prefer that its users refrain from using them.
Even when packaged by RPM Fusion, the Catalyst driver is a pain to use in Fedora because the kernel is updating so frequently. Installing it from upstream is even worse.
Luckily Radeon driver and Linux kernel development moves so fast that after a year I was able to successfully run w/o Catalyst. But that first year was hell.
I've been running Fedora on this laptop since F18 because it was the best on this hardware at the time, and I love Fedora. But if Catalyst was important to me, I'd be looking elsewhere (CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu ...).
While Fedora is plenty stable overall, it's not so stable when running Catalyst because AMD is so far behind and Fedora is moving so quickly, so for those reasons -- plus Radeon's great strides in recent years -- I don't miss it.
But there is no love for Catalyst among Fedora contributors, or somebody would be packaging it for RPM Fusion.
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click
If you want to do high-performance computing in the GPU in Linux, you pretty much need both the proprietary drivers *and* proprietary HPC libraries from the vendors. For a variety of reasons I don't expect that to change. There's been some steps towards opening those things up, but I have never been able to get them to run in *any* Linux distro *ever*. It's not Fedora or Ubuntu or openSUSE - it's the vendors.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Steven Rosenberg stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Enrico Tagliavini enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com wrote:
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
RPM Fusion support for Nvidia seems OK, but support for Catalyst/fglrx has been nonexistent in Fedora 20-22.
My hardware (2013 HP laptop) eventually "aged out" of needing fglrx/Catalyst, and running the open Radeon is less trouble, for sure. But for new hardware, it's sure nice to have Catalyst (and I presume Nvidia) around and packaged.
But I've accepted that the Fedora Project doesn't want proprietary graphics drivers in its archive, and would really (really, really) prefer that its users refrain from using them.
Even when packaged by RPM Fusion, the Catalyst driver is a pain to use in Fedora because the kernel is updating so frequently. Installing it from upstream is even worse.
Luckily Radeon driver and Linux kernel development moves so fast that after a year I was able to successfully run w/o Catalyst. But that first year was hell.
I've been running Fedora on this laptop since F18 because it was the best on this hardware at the time, and I love Fedora. But if Catalyst was important to me, I'd be looking elsewhere (CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu ...).
While Fedora is plenty stable overall, it's not so stable when running Catalyst because AMD is so far behind and Fedora is moving so quickly, so for those reasons -- plus Radeon's great strides in recent years -- I don't miss it.
But there is no love for Catalyst among Fedora contributors, or somebody would be packaging it for RPM Fusion.
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
Hi Steven,
as I said already I was the person doing the fglrx package for gentoo for a couple of years (and I stepped up because radeon was not good enough for my card), so I know the pain. And I can tell you this is 100% AMD fault. Long story short their main targets are enterprise distributions like Red Hat and SLES. They try to get Ubuntu as well but at the end of the day they have to ship a very pre release driver just for Ubuntu to get it working. They don't care about upstream Linux kernel and Xorg support and they don't care about Fedora.
This is the reason I stepped down from the fglrx package maintainer in gentoo. It is not that Fedora people has no love for fglrx, it is simply that fglrx doesn't work with up to date components. *It cannot start at all*. Don't call Fedora contributors or rpmfusion devs hater on Catalyst, they are not! It is the opposite: AMD has no love for Fedora and upstream Linux and Xorg. It is 100% AMD fault.
You can see a very different behaviour in the two main competitors: Intel has a serious open source driver solution, Nvidia is promptly supporting new upstream releases.
Crippling Fedora by shipping *unsupported* kernel releases (normal kernel releases are supported for a very short time) or outdated Xorg packages would be a great damage to the Fedora project. As much as free software and open source packages should meet a quality standard in Fedora (for example see why Chromium is not available), so must proprietary stuff if that has to be included (via rpmfusion if this is the preferred way). Fglrx, as it is today, is not going to meet the requirements. Maybe the new version based on AMDGPU has a chance.... only time will tell.
If you want to use AMD hardware you have to use an OS supported by them. Fedora is not one and this has to change AMD side first, then a package in rpmfusion would appear in no time I'm sure.
The text you quoted from me was not to ask for inclusion of every proprietary driver, especially at the expense of the main project goal. But of course software alone doesn't make a computer, if you have a component better supported by proprietary drivers where the open source one is missing or falling short (your point about your laptop aging out is very valid, and very frustrating process) I think the proprietary option should be available with a reasonably low effort for a normal user (not an advanced user). So my point was not to add more proprietary drivers into rpmfusion (well not necessarily), but to make it a little bit easier for the end user.
Best regards
On 8 June 2015 at 19:13, Steven Rosenberg stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Enrico Tagliavini enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com wrote:
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
RPM Fusion support for Nvidia seems OK, but support for Catalyst/fglrx has been nonexistent in Fedora 20-22.
My hardware (2013 HP laptop) eventually "aged out" of needing fglrx/Catalyst, and running the open Radeon is less trouble, for sure. But for new hardware, it's sure nice to have Catalyst (and I presume Nvidia) around and packaged.
But I've accepted that the Fedora Project doesn't want proprietary graphics drivers in its archive, and would really (really, really) prefer that its users refrain from using them.
Even when packaged by RPM Fusion, the Catalyst driver is a pain to use in Fedora because the kernel is updating so frequently. Installing it from upstream is even worse.
Luckily Radeon driver and Linux kernel development moves so fast that after a year I was able to successfully run w/o Catalyst. But that first year was hell.
I've been running Fedora on this laptop since F18 because it was the best on this hardware at the time, and I love Fedora. But if Catalyst was important to me, I'd be looking elsewhere (CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu ...).
While Fedora is plenty stable overall, it's not so stable when running Catalyst because AMD is so far behind and Fedora is moving so quickly, so for those reasons -- plus Radeon's great strides in recent years -- I don't miss it.
But there is no love for Catalyst among Fedora contributors, or somebody would be packaging it for RPM Fusion.
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
hi I'll completely and 100 percent second this. I can't argue on whether a given card needs open source vs proprietary drivers. What I can say is, if the driver isn't meeting your standards and the reason is not linux, don't blame linux. Blame the vender for being lax. IN fact, I'll go so far as to say that linux developers do their best to work with what they have, and in the case of nouveau, I understand the devs that work there have to deal with whatever scraps of unimportant documentation nvidia throws their way, and somehow turn that into a working driver, so it's no wonder they have trouble. I've also heard that redhat has people actively working on improving the state of nouveau, and when redhat throws people at a project, it improves, quickly. No, I don't work for redhat, I've just seen the quality of their code and some of the people that work for them.
Thanks Kendell clark
Enrico Tagliavini wrote:
Hi Steven,
as I said already I was the person doing the fglrx package for gentoo for a couple of years (and I stepped up because radeon was not good enough for my card), so I know the pain. And I can tell you this is 100% AMD fault. Long story short their main targets are enterprise distributions like Red Hat and SLES. They try to get Ubuntu as well but at the end of the day they have to ship a very pre release driver just for Ubuntu to get it working. They don't care about upstream Linux kernel and Xorg support and they don't care about Fedora.
This is the reason I stepped down from the fglrx package maintainer in gentoo. It is not that Fedora people has no love for fglrx, it is simply that fglrx doesn't work with up to date components. *It cannot start at all*. Don't call Fedora contributors or rpmfusion devs hater on Catalyst, they are not! It is the opposite: AMD has no love for Fedora and upstream Linux and Xorg. It is 100% AMD fault.
You can see a very different behaviour in the two main competitors: Intel has a serious open source driver solution, Nvidia is promptly supporting new upstream releases.
Crippling Fedora by shipping *unsupported* kernel releases (normal kernel releases are supported for a very short time) or outdated Xorg packages would be a great damage to the Fedora project. As much as free software and open source packages should meet a quality standard in Fedora (for example see why Chromium is not available), so must proprietary stuff if that has to be included (via rpmfusion if this is the preferred way). Fglrx, as it is today, is not going to meet the requirements. Maybe the new version based on AMDGPU has a chance.... only time will tell.
If you want to use AMD hardware you have to use an OS supported by them. Fedora is not one and this has to change AMD side first, then a package in rpmfusion would appear in no time I'm sure.
The text you quoted from me was not to ask for inclusion of every proprietary driver, especially at the expense of the main project goal. But of course software alone doesn't make a computer, if you have a component better supported by proprietary drivers where the open source one is missing or falling short (your point about your laptop aging out is very valid, and very frustrating process) I think the proprietary option should be available with a reasonably low effort for a normal user (not an advanced user). So my point was not to add more proprietary drivers into rpmfusion (well not necessarily), but to make it a little bit easier for the end user.
Best regards
On 8 June 2015 at 19:13, Steven Rosenberg stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Enrico Tagliavini enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com wrote:
well you might be lucky enough not to need proprietary drivers and this add a lot of benefits both in practical terms and also in ethics if you believe in free software. That said if you don't support proprietary driver you basically cut out people from using Fedora. The only and main reason I don't suggest Fedora to my friends starting with Linux is it misses NVIDIA proprietary drivers support and bumblebee packages [1]. Granted there is rpmfusion for the drivers.... but bumblebee is another story. The repo mentioned in the fedora wiki is not really up to quality standard, at all. But I digress.
RPM Fusion support for Nvidia seems OK, but support for Catalyst/fglrx has been nonexistent in Fedora 20-22.
My hardware (2013 HP laptop) eventually "aged out" of needing fglrx/Catalyst, and running the open Radeon is less trouble, for sure. But for new hardware, it's sure nice to have Catalyst (and I presume Nvidia) around and packaged.
But I've accepted that the Fedora Project doesn't want proprietary graphics drivers in its archive, and would really (really, really) prefer that its users refrain from using them.
Even when packaged by RPM Fusion, the Catalyst driver is a pain to use in Fedora because the kernel is updating so frequently. Installing it from upstream is even worse.
Luckily Radeon driver and Linux kernel development moves so fast that after a year I was able to successfully run w/o Catalyst. But that first year was hell.
I've been running Fedora on this laptop since F18 because it was the best on this hardware at the time, and I love Fedora. But if Catalyst was important to me, I'd be looking elsewhere (CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu ...).
While Fedora is plenty stable overall, it's not so stable when running Catalyst because AMD is so far behind and Fedora is moving so quickly, so for those reasons -- plus Radeon's great strides in recent years -- I don't miss it.
But there is no love for Catalyst among Fedora contributors, or somebody would be packaging it for RPM Fusion.
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Enrico Tagliavini < enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Steven,
as I said already I was the person doing the fglrx package for gentoo for a couple of years (and I stepped up because radeon was not good enough for my card), so I know the pain. And I can tell you this is 100% AMD fault. Long story short their main targets are enterprise distributions like Red Hat and SLES. They try to get Ubuntu as well but at the end of the day they have to ship a very pre release driver just for Ubuntu to get it working. They don't care about upstream Linux kernel and Xorg support and they don't care about Fedora.
This is the reason I stepped down from the fglrx package maintainer in gentoo. It is not that Fedora people has no love for fglrx, it is simply that fglrx doesn't work with up to date components. *It cannot start at all*. Don't call Fedora contributors or rpmfusion devs hater on Catalyst, they are not! It is the opposite: AMD has no love for Fedora and upstream Linux and Xorg. It is 100% AMD fault.
You can see a very different behaviour in the two main competitors: Intel has a serious open source driver solution, Nvidia is promptly supporting new upstream releases.
Crippling Fedora by shipping *unsupported* kernel releases (normal kernel releases are supported for a very short time) or outdated Xorg packages would be a great damage to the Fedora project. As much as free software and open source packages should meet a quality standard in Fedora (for example see why Chromium is not available), so must proprietary stuff if that has to be included (via rpmfusion if this is the preferred way). Fglrx, as it is today, is not going to meet the requirements. Maybe the new version based on AMDGPU has a chance.... only time will tell.
If you want to use AMD hardware you have to use an OS supported by them. Fedora is not one and this has to change AMD side first, then a package in rpmfusion would appear in no time I'm sure.
The text you quoted from me was not to ask for inclusion of every proprietary driver, especially at the expense of the main project goal. But of course software alone doesn't make a computer, if you have a component better supported by proprietary drivers where the open source one is missing or falling short (your point about your laptop aging out is very valid, and very frustrating process) I think the proprietary option should be available with a reasonably low effort for a normal user (not an advanced user). So my point was not to add more proprietary drivers into rpmfusion (well not necessarily), but to make it a little bit easier for the end user.
Thanks for the clarification. I know how hard it is for the end user to keep fglrx/Catalyst working, and that is often with the help of a packager.
I don't know how Debian and Ubuntu manage to keep fglrx in their distros, but I imagine it's because they keep the same kernel version throughout the release, whereas Fedora is continually changing kernels during that time.
Now that my laptop is two years old, it runs great with Radeon, and I no longer have to worry about upgrading the kernel and breaking fglrx. So I'm happy.
But the newest hardware often needs the newest kernels -- a great reason to run Fedora. Unfortunately Radeon doesn't always support the latest AMD chips, and that's where fglrx comes in.
I guess the takeaway is, "Buy AMD at your own risk."
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com steven@stevenrosenberg.net
It is I'm afraid :(. FYI the kernel is the smaller problem with fglrx. There fglrx compatibility layer kernel module is actually open source. In gentoo I was trying my best to patch it to get it working with the latest kernel. It is quite a painful and fragile process though. What you cannot patch is the DDX driver (so the Xorg connected part), there is no compatibility layer provided there. This is where other traditional (as non rolling) distributions have life easier than Fedora: they usually don't ship with the latest version of Xorg, and they don't update it within the same release.
If you look at AMD website [1] you can read they support xorg-server up to version 1.16. Xorg 1.17 was released on February 4th, 4 months ago. Ubuntu 15.04 has a pre-alpha version of fglrx supporting 1.17 (keep in mind AMD and Canonical have an agreement for this, all other distros do not have this privilege, still they managed to get blamed for late Xorg updates [3]). Usually it takes many months to get official support. Rolling distribution with up to date components such as Arch Linux share the same problem as Fedora [4]. As you can see a user is volunteering to maintain a backport repository with older version of Xorg just for the use with the AMD proprietary driver.
For the sake of comparison Nvidia added support for Xorg 1.17 on December 8th 2014, two full months before Xorg 1.17 release.
Sorry for the off topic. I think this information is worth to share, help users a lot avoiding unexpected pain.
[1] http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop?os=Linux+x86 [2] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTg1NzM [3] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTc3NzM [4] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AMD_Catalyst#xorg116
On 9 June 2015 at 21:43, Steven Rosenberg stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Enrico Tagliavini enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Steven,
as I said already I was the person doing the fglrx package for gentoo for a couple of years (and I stepped up because radeon was not good enough for my card), so I know the pain. And I can tell you this is 100% AMD fault. Long story short their main targets are enterprise distributions like Red Hat and SLES. They try to get Ubuntu as well but at the end of the day they have to ship a very pre release driver just for Ubuntu to get it working. They don't care about upstream Linux kernel and Xorg support and they don't care about Fedora.
This is the reason I stepped down from the fglrx package maintainer in gentoo. It is not that Fedora people has no love for fglrx, it is simply that fglrx doesn't work with up to date components. *It cannot start at all*. Don't call Fedora contributors or rpmfusion devs hater on Catalyst, they are not! It is the opposite: AMD has no love for Fedora and upstream Linux and Xorg. It is 100% AMD fault.
You can see a very different behaviour in the two main competitors: Intel has a serious open source driver solution, Nvidia is promptly supporting new upstream releases.
Crippling Fedora by shipping *unsupported* kernel releases (normal kernel releases are supported for a very short time) or outdated Xorg packages would be a great damage to the Fedora project. As much as free software and open source packages should meet a quality standard in Fedora (for example see why Chromium is not available), so must proprietary stuff if that has to be included (via rpmfusion if this is the preferred way). Fglrx, as it is today, is not going to meet the requirements. Maybe the new version based on AMDGPU has a chance.... only time will tell.
If you want to use AMD hardware you have to use an OS supported by them. Fedora is not one and this has to change AMD side first, then a package in rpmfusion would appear in no time I'm sure.
The text you quoted from me was not to ask for inclusion of every proprietary driver, especially at the expense of the main project goal. But of course software alone doesn't make a computer, if you have a component better supported by proprietary drivers where the open source one is missing or falling short (your point about your laptop aging out is very valid, and very frustrating process) I think the proprietary option should be available with a reasonably low effort for a normal user (not an advanced user). So my point was not to add more proprietary drivers into rpmfusion (well not necessarily), but to make it a little bit easier for the end user.
Thanks for the clarification. I know how hard it is for the end user to keep fglrx/Catalyst working, and that is often with the help of a packager.
I don't know how Debian and Ubuntu manage to keep fglrx in their distros, but I imagine it's because they keep the same kernel version throughout the release, whereas Fedora is continually changing kernels during that time.
Now that my laptop is two years old, it runs great with Radeon, and I no longer have to worry about upgrading the kernel and breaking fglrx. So I'm happy.
But the newest hardware often needs the newest kernels -- a great reason to run Fedora. Unfortunately Radeon doesn't always support the latest AMD chips, and that's where fglrx comes in.
I guess the takeaway is, "Buy AMD at your own risk."
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com steven@stevenrosenberg.net
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Enrico Tagliavini < enrico.tagliavini@gmail.com> wrote:
If you look at AMD website [1] you can read they support xorg-server up to version 1.16. Xorg 1.17 was released on February 4th, 4 months ago. Ubuntu 15.04 has a pre-alpha version of fglrx supporting 1.17 (keep in mind AMD and Canonical have an agreement for this, all other distros do not have this privilege, still they managed to get blamed for late Xorg updates [3]). Usually it takes many months to get official support. Rolling distribution with up to date components such as Arch Linux share the same problem as Fedora [4]. As you can see a user is volunteering to maintain a backport repository with older version of Xorg just for the use with the AMD proprietary driver.
For the sake of comparison Nvidia added support for Xorg 1.17 on December 8th 2014, two full months before Xorg 1.17 release.
Sorry for the off topic. I think this information is worth to share, help users a lot avoiding unexpected pain.
Yikes.
-- Steven Rosenberg http://stevenrosenberg.net/blog http://blogs.dailynews.com/click stevenhrosenberg@gmail.com steven@stevenrosenberg.net
On Thu, 2015-06-04 at 14:48 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
They have a follow-up review here: http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/8 3062/disjunctive-normal-fedora-lup-95/
I haven't watched it yet.
It begins at 1:07:45.
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Ankur Sinha -
Enrico Tagliavini -
kendell clark -
Luya Tshimbalanga -
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky -
Michael Catanzaro -
Paul W. Frields -
Steven Rosenberg