[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A Critique: Getting Started with GNUstep on Windows

From: Riccardo Mottola
Subject: Re: A Critique: Getting Started with GNUstep on Windows
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:38:42 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39


Gregory Casamento wrote:

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016, Riccardo Mottola <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:


    Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:

        It would be nice to target the Rasbpberry Pi using Wayland

    me too. except for Wayland. I want to have run on raspbian
    smoothly instead of the provided WM they have.

Why not wayland? Network transparency is not something which is super important these days even on the rpi. Wayland brings us a number of advantages:

Right for such a small box network transparency is a good thing.
Some people may want to use a "mini computer" like the piOS guys with the mini NeXT CUBE, but others may want to deploy it headless.

Also, currently X11 works fine on the Pi and the raspbian is , thus my statement was intented for the short-term future.

I think we can support wayland along X!!? actually we absolutely should. If Wayland becomes interesting on the PI we can just the other backend.

What's the best way to be interesting on the PI and similar project? exploit their current stuff and make the best experience right now and gradually improve it? Or imagine a disrupitve change.. and be ready in a year with a new backend (which means we will fix and improve other things less)?

* native compositing
* it expects frameworks to draw their own Windows something we do extremely well.
* it supports true window transparency
* it allows animations and such to be done much more l easily if and when needed
* etc

I think we really need to question whether X truly serves our needs. No one is saying leave it behind. What we are saying is to take advantage of the things wayland does for us.

Sure.. but is Wayland to help us on these small devices, to be more appealing there? Taking in consideration that the GPU and FPU of these machines aren't that fast, so effects and other gizmo need to be used sparingly. My thought was not general, not on a super-workstation with 8 cores and twin GPUs and more videoram than the PI itself has.

These need to be looked at. Slowness has been a problem. I can remember using GNUstep on a 128mb Linux machine 10-12 years ago. I would like to get some benchmarks which are unbiased about our performance rather than hearsay and conjecture. I would also like us to focus on hardware on which GNUstep will be realistically deployed rather than taking the netbsd approach and worrying about making it work everywhere.

I think if would be interesting to have some sort of "gradual degradation" of features vs. speed. A bit like WIndows does with Aero depending on your hardware, but not applied only to graphics.
Of course, general optimiazions benefit everybody, no doubt.
I suppose though that people wanting to use GNUstep on their workstation or laptop to develop natively, would like all the features.

While the Raspberry has a decent CPU, its FPU and GPU are slow compared to it as sperhaps are other component. That is, if I take an older computer with x86 or ppc with comparable cpu, I see that it feels a lot snappier. Cairo, for example, is heavy on the FPU and generally, GNUstep is quite heavy on it. That's the reason why the letux400 with a 360Mhz effective clockspeed, but no FPU is very very slow with GNUstep, slower than a 100Mhz SPARC cpu! Other applications, which do not use cairo/art/gtk... can be reasonably fast.

In Dublin with Richard we found that memory usage is quite high, but found no obvious reason for it, not a particular dependency to disable.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]