Re: RFC: compat list
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:31:11PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: My understanding is roughly at least for Intel any card ≥ i915/945, though i915 is about the very minimum. We do need to get recent data about ATI and NVIDIA; can anyone help fill in? Could we gather this automatically? I thought Fedora has some software which voluntary collects hardware data. Combine this if gnome-shell is running and you'd know the minimum. -- Regards, Olav ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: RFC: compat list
2011/5/1 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl: On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:31:11PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: My understanding is roughly at least for Intel any card ≥ i915/945, though i915 is about the very minimum. We do need to get recent data about ATI and NVIDIA; can anyone help fill in? Could we gather this automatically? I thought Fedora has some software which voluntary collects hardware data. Combine this if gnome-shell is running and you'd know the minimum. You're probably referring to: http://smolts.org/ But it doesn't collect software data, so we can't do any kind of correlation. Actually, probably the best source of data now is: http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/Status So for NVIDIA that links to: http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/FeatureMatrix For ATI: http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon?highlight=%28CategoryHardwareChipset%29 ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: RFC: compat list
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 14:31 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: Hi Sergey, On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Sergey Udaltsov s...@gnome.org wrote: Would it make sense to consolidate all HW+GL-related information (requirements) on a single page on live.gnome.org? Minimal list of extensions, hints (do not use this driver, do not use those chips, etc) I think we really do need a high level description of the current state somewhere, yes. My understanding is roughly at least for Intel any card ≥ i915/945, though i915 is about the very minimum. We do need to get recent data about ATI and NVIDIA; can anyone help fill in? My nVidia Corporation GT216 [GeForce GT 230M] (rev a2) seems to be working very well; no issues and performance is very good. Display is totally frack'd on resume [from suspend or hibernate]. But I believe that is just an issue with suspend/resume not working with GNOME 3 in general(?). ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: RFC: compat list
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 17:41 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 14:31 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: Hi Sergey, On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Sergey Udaltsov s...@gnome.org wrote: Would it make sense to consolidate all HW+GL-related information (requirements) on a single page on live.gnome.org? Minimal list of extensions, hints (do not use this driver, do not use those chips, etc) I think we really do need a high level description of the current state somewhere, yes. My understanding is roughly at least for Intel any card ≥ i915/945, though i915 is about the very minimum. We do need to get recent data about ATI and NVIDIA; can anyone help fill in? My nVidia Corporation GT216 [GeForce GT 230M] (rev a2) seems to be working very well; no issues and performance is very good. Can everyone please include details of whether they are using the binary nvidia/ati driver or the FOSS one/s (and the version if possible) John ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: RFC: compat list
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 11:15 +1200, John Stowers wrote: On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 17:41 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 14:31 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: Hi Sergey, On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Sergey Udaltsov s...@gnome.org wrote: Would it make sense to consolidate all HW+GL-related information (requirements) on a single page on live.gnome.org? Minimal list of extensions, hints (do not use this driver, do not use those chips, etc) I think we really do need a high level description of the current state somewhere, yes. My understanding is roughly at least for Intel any card ≥ i915/945, though i915 is about the very minimum. We do need to get recent data about ATI and NVIDIA; can anyone help fill in? My nVidia Corporation GT216 [GeForce GT 230M] (rev a2) seems to be working very well; no issues and performance is very good. Can everyone please include details of whether they are using the binary nvidia/ati driver or the FOSS one/s (and the version if possible) Card: nVidia Corporation GT216 [GeForce GT 230M] (rev a2) Driver: nvidia-gfxG02-kmp-desktop-270.41.06_k2.6.37.1_1.2-4.1.x86_64 LINUX: 2.6.37.6-0.5-desktop x86_64 openSUSE 11.4 Haven't tried with multi-head yet; at least under GNOME 2.32 that always disabled 3D effects. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Feedback
On Saturday, 30 April, 2011 09:40 PM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: == Suspend instead of Shutdown == Surely this has been discussed extensively, I just want to mention that suspend simply does not work for me (tested on two computers, both do not wake up correctly). I guess they do not want to listen as I recall. Generally I like the gnome philosophy of simplifying things by removing options. But leaving non-technical users with a default setting that does not work is not a good choice. It should only be a default if we detect you computer can support it. Can you give us some hardware details, and try: pm-utils --suspend echo Supported || echo Not supported in a terminal? IMO, the presence of Suspend should be only available to development builds(or optional in stable releases). I only once use Suspend in my system because it will mess the system and I will be forced to use the _reset_ button and I will never use it again as it may physically damage the Hard Drive. Calling the terminal is just a band aid, it doesn't work at large. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Feedback
I'm not suggesting the Terminal for everyday usage. I'm just trying to get some hardware and pm-utils stats so we can solve the problem for other users... all that command will do is print out Supported or Not Supported, just as a starting point for the hellish journey ahead of us: Debugging Linux Power Management On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Allan E. Registos allan.regis...@smpc.steniel.com.ph wrote: On Saturday, 30 April, 2011 09:40 PM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: == Suspend instead of Shutdown == Surely this has been discussed extensively, I just want to mention that suspend simply does not work for me (tested on two computers, both do not wake up correctly). I guess they do not want to listen as I recall. Generally I like the gnome philosophy of simplifying things by removing options. But leaving non-technical users with a default setting that does not work is not a good choice. It should only be a default if we detect you computer can support it. Can you give us some hardware details, and try: pm-utils --suspend echo Supported || echo Not supported in a terminal? IMO, the presence of Suspend should be only available to development builds(or optional in stable releases). I only once use Suspend in my system because it will mess the system and I will be forced to use the _reset_ button and I will never use it again as it may physically damage the Hard Drive. Calling the terminal is just a band aid, it doesn't work at large. Regards, Allan ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Feedback
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Allan E. Registos allan.regis...@smpc.steniel.com.ph wrote: On Saturday, 30 April, 2011 09:40 PM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: == Suspend instead of Shutdown == Surely this has been discussed extensively, I just want to mention that suspend simply does not work for me (tested on two computers, both do not wake up correctly). I guess they do not want to listen as I recall. Well, I wouldn't say that.. I'm sure there at least in Fedora that the distros will be trying to get suspend working. Suspend has to work. It needs to be exactly like the Mac. My wife for instances, always closes, she never shuts down her laptop. The same can be said of both desktop and laptop. It is a matter of getting distros to fix it. Personally, gnome 3 is about pushing distros to start fixing as much of this stuff as possible. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
