Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: No Plymouth Coming To Ubuntu 9.10

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,397

    Default No Plymouth Coming To Ubuntu 9.10

    Phoronix: No Plymouth Coming To Ubuntu 9.10

    Plymouth, a project spawned by Red Hat to replace RHGB in Fedora with a much cleaner boot splash program that leverages newer technologies like kernel mode-setting, will not be finding its way into Ubuntu. Originally, it was considered that Plymouth could replace USplash in Ubuntu 9.04, but then Canonical and other developers decided to push that transition off to Ubuntu 9.10...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzI5NQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,091

    Default

    So the next "stable" "LTS" release will introduce KMS, Plymouth, GNOME 3.0 etc. ... I wonder how that turns out (especially GNOME 3.0)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    So the next "stable" "LTS" release will introduce KMS, Plymouth, GNOME 3.0 etc. ... I wonder how that turns out (especially GNOME 3.0)
    From the sound of things, they're not pushing Plymouth off to 10.04, they're just declining it altogether since they figure it's not worth including if the boot time is less than 10 seconds anyway. Oh, and us Intel users should already have KMS by 9.10.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    116

    Default

    The next LTS release will probably end up being 10.10 mopey mammoth to sync it up with debian's release around the same time anyhow, and also for a more stable gnome

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    258

    Default

    I hardly get the rationale here. Even if boottime (grub > desktop) is reduced to mere 10 seconds, you can use Plymouth in those 10 seconds. This is not about whether it's worth to include it or not, it's what are you going to do with those 10 seconds, since you have to wait them anyway.

    Now, 10 seconds are not enough to go get yourself a coffee. In fact, 10 seconds hardly justify doing anything else than sitting in front of the screen and _waiting_ for those 10 seconds to pass. So while we're at it, why not make a pleasurable, ever-changing experience? With alternating plugins, themes, or even the same theme with the same plugin being various enough to not be repetitive, it could be really nice.

    Well, my pair of cents.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3

    Lightbulb KMS

    Can anyone clarify this:

    Ubuntu is not shipping Plymouth AT ALL

    and

    Will 9.10 have KMS in it?



    To be honest I don't really mind if there is no pretty splash, however the boot better be REALLY fast!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,184

    Default

    AFAICT, Ubuntu develops their LTS releases like any other release, except they roll out critical patches for a longer period of time. They introduced (a poorly configured) PulseAudio in Hardy, which was a poor decision if they were focused on stability over the latest features.

    If I was truly concerned with stability for a production environment, Debian stable (or even testing) would be much higher on the list than Ubuntu.

    Oh, and if they're shooting for absolute lowest boot time, why bother with usplash at all? I see a lot of complaints/bugs stemming from it. Text boot FTW!
    Last edited by DanL; 05-29-2009 at 11:01 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    7

    Default

    This seems like an excellent decision. I'd far rather a boot time ~10s than a fancy graphical boot.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Oh, and if they're shooting for absolute lowest boot time, why bother with usplash at all? I see a lot of complaints/bugs stemming from it. Text boot FTW!
    Considering that text boot takes roughly the same amount of time (seriously) as the usplash or any of the other modes seem to (The time doesn't come from doing pretty things to the screen or just raw text- it comes from the operations being done to generate either, which have traditionally been done serially throughout the boot up, when there's quite a few things that could have been done in parallel...) your remark isn't actually helpful...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    Considering that text boot takes roughly the same amount of time (seriously) as the usplash
    The bootcharts I've seen tell a different story, and when boot times get that low, 1s is significant, so maybe my remark was more "helpful" than you think

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •