Re: Ubuntu switching to Unity Desktop

[Chris Jones]

On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 12:12 -0500, Brian David wrote:
> Holstein just posted this on IRC.  It's worth re-posting to the list:
> 
> http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Ubuntu-1104-to-switch-to-Unity-desktop/?kc=rss
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -- 
> -Brian David

When I was the Co-Maintainer for the Fedora Design Suite Spin, we
recently had a related discussion on the move to Gnome-Shell when it was
available. And seeing as the main Red Hat/Fedora distro was moving to
G3, we were considering whether to also move to G3 or stick with a
stable version of Gnome 2.x.

After weighing up the pros/cons, we decided that it would be too much
effort and manual labor to stick with an interface that was different
from that of our mainstream 'mother' distro.

I assume the same outcome will come out of this announcement for Ubuntu
and Ubuntu Studio.


-- 

Chris Jones

PHOTO RESOLUTIONS - Photo - Graphic - Web
www: http://photoresolutions.freehostia.com
@: chrisjo...@comcen.com.au
ABN: 98 317 740 240


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Ubuntu switching to Unity Desktop

[Brian David]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Antoine Thomas  wrote:

>
> Imho, we should first test if Unity desktop has a good or bad influence on
> stability and performances. Once tested, it will be time to say if it is
> good to keep Gnome and wait for Gnome 3.0, or follow on Unity.
>
> Think that if we choose to continue to use Gnome desktop, we will have to
> maintain more stuff by ourselves, this is a lot of work, or perhaps there
> will be a new Gubuntu flavor (like Kubuntu) on which we might count. But it
> means a lot of work and skills we don't have. Maybe it's better to focus on
> applications packaging, performance optimization, etc... than on which
> desktop should the default one.
>
> If Unity works well, why should we bored ??
>
> Toine
>
>
Spent some time messing around with Unity today and. . .I kind of like it,
to be honest.  Give it a few more months of tweaking and I'd be completely
okay with using it.

I am concerned about the 3d graphics requirement.  I know a lot of people
use Ubuntu (and Linux in general) to run older machines, so that could be an
issue.

-- 
-Brian David
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Natty -lowlatency kernel

[Brian David]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 3:02 AM, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would want let you notice that I made a preliminary (and untested)
> version of the Natty -lowlatency kernel for testing.
> It is available through my PPA
> (
> https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=natty
> ).
>
> I suggest to use a VM for first tests at least.
>
> Any feedback is welcome!
>
> Ciao,
> Alessio
>
>
I attempted to test -lowlatency, but could not even get JACK started on my
VM Natty install.  Virtual Machines run very slow on my computer, making it
frustrating to test things.  I'll try again when the first alpha gets
released.

-- 
-Brian David
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Ubuntu switching to Unity Desktop

[Louie Queral]

curious, what's gnome 3.0 supposed to be like?

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Antoine Thomas  wrote:

>
>
> 2010/10/27 Luke Yelavich 
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:12:54PM EDT, Brian David wrote:
>> > Holstein just posted this on IRC.  It's worth re-posting to the list:
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Ubuntu-1104-to-switch-to-Unity-desktop/?kc=rss
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>> To be clear, Studio does not have to follow this path. Being a derivitive,
>> studio can decide what it wants to do, whether it uses unity, gnome-shell,
>> or stick with the usual GNOME panel interface. Of course its up to the
>> project developers to decide, but just because Ubuntu is changing, doesn't
>> mean UbuntuStudio has to.
>>
>> Luke
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
>> Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>>
>
> Imho, we should first test if Unity desktop has a good or bad influence on
> stability and performances. Once tested, it will be time to say if it is
> good to keep Gnome and wait for Gnome 3.0, or follow on Unity.
>
> Think that if we choose to continue to use Gnome desktop, we will have to
> maintain more stuff by ourselves, this is a lot of work, or perhaps there
> will be a new Gubuntu flavor (like Kubuntu) on which we might count. But it
> means a lot of work and skills we don't have. Maybe it's better to focus on
> applications packaging, performance optimization, etc... than on which
> desktop should the default one.
>
> If Unity works well, why should we bored ??
>
> Toine
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>
>
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Ubuntu switching to Unity Desktop

[Antoine Thomas]

2010/10/27 Luke Yelavich 

> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:12:54PM EDT, Brian David wrote:
> > Holstein just posted this on IRC.  It's worth re-posting to the list:
> >
> >
> http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Ubuntu-1104-to-switch-to-Unity-desktop/?kc=rss
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> To be clear, Studio does not have to follow this path. Being a derivitive,
> studio can decide what it wants to do, whether it uses unity, gnome-shell,
> or stick with the usual GNOME panel interface. Of course its up to the
> project developers to decide, but just because Ubuntu is changing, doesn't
> mean UbuntuStudio has to.
>
> Luke
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>

Imho, we should first test if Unity desktop has a good or bad influence on
stability and performances. Once tested, it will be time to say if it is
good to keep Gnome and wait for Gnome 3.0, or follow on Unity.

Think that if we choose to continue to use Gnome desktop, we will have to
maintain more stuff by ourselves, this is a lot of work, or perhaps there
will be a new Gubuntu flavor (like Kubuntu) on which we might count. But it
means a lot of work and skills we don't have. Maybe it's better to focus on
applications packaging, performance optimization, etc... than on which
desktop should the default one.

If Unity works well, why should we bored ??

Toine
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Ubuntu switching to Unity Desktop

[Luke Yelavich]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 01:12:54PM EDT, Brian David wrote:
> Holstein just posted this on IRC.  It's worth re-posting to the list:
> 
> http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Ubuntu-1104-to-switch-to-Unity-desktop/?kc=rss
> 
> Thoughts?

To be clear, Studio does not have to follow this path. Being a derivitive, 
studio can decide what it wants to do, whether it uses unity, gnome-shell, or 
stick with the usual GNOME panel interface. Of course its up to the project 
developers to decide, but just because Ubuntu is changing, doesn't mean 
UbuntuStudio has to.

Luke

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Natty -lowlatency kernel

[Ronan Jouchet]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:52 AM, David Henningsson
 wrote:
> On 2010-10-27 04:02, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would want let you notice that I made a preliminary (and untested)
>> version of the Natty -lowlatency kernel for testing.
>> It is available through my PPA
>> (https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=natty).
>>
>> I suggest to use a VM for first tests at least.
>>
>> Any feedback is welcome!
> Cool, and good timing, since there is a UDS session tomorrow when this
> flavour is going to be discussed. Here's some feedback. I'm at UDS but I
> was bold enough to install it directly on Maverick, on my laptop with an
> HDA card.
>
> I tried to do some testing and so far I haven't seen any difference. I
> haven't experienced any instability or something like that, but I
> haven't experienced any improvments either. I tried jack with 256x2
> buffers and got underruns with both the standard Maverick kernel and the
> 2.6.36-1-lowlatency kernel. 2x1024 gave no underruns on the generic one,
> never tested that setting on the lowlatency version.
>
> Perhaps I've done something wrong. I should really do more testing, see
> if there is any buffer size where there is a difference, and try to get
> to the bottom of that to see what's actually causing the underruns.
> (Which means I have to learn how to do that...)
>
> // David

I will try it this weekend with my FA66 firewire card on various
settings & workloads, and report back here.
Great job Alessio, good to see -lowlatency moving forward for Natty!
Cheers,

Ronan

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: Natty -lowlatency kernel

[David Henningsson]

On 2010-10-27 04:02, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would want let you notice that I made a preliminary (and untested)
> version of the Natty -lowlatency kernel for testing.
> It is available through my PPA
> (https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=natty).
>
> I suggest to use a VM for first tests at least.
>
> Any feedback is welcome!
Cool, and good timing, since there is a UDS session tomorrow when this 
flavour is going to be discussed. Here's some feedback. I'm at UDS but I 
was bold enough to install it directly on Maverick, on my laptop with an 
HDA card.

I tried to do some testing and so far I haven't seen any difference. I 
haven't experienced any instability or something like that, but I 
haven't experienced any improvments either. I tried jack with 256x2 
buffers and got underruns with both the standard Maverick kernel and the 
2.6.36-1-lowlatency kernel. 2x1024 gave no underruns on the generic one, 
never tested that setting on the lowlatency version.

Perhaps I've done something wrong. I should really do more testing, see 
if there is any buffer size where there is a difference, and try to get 
to the bottom of that to see what's actually causing the underruns. 
(Which means I have to learn how to do that...)

// David


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Natty -lowlatency kernel

[Alessio Igor Bogani]

Hi,

I would want let you notice that I made a preliminary (and untested)
version of the Natty -lowlatency kernel for testing.
It is available through my PPA
(https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=natty).

I suggest to use a VM for first tests at least.

Any feedback is welcome!

Ciao,
Alessio

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel