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...
So the next "stable" "LTS" release will introduce KMS, Plymouth, GNOME 3.0 etc. ... I wonder how that turns out (especially GNOME 3.0)
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
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.
Can anyone clarify this:
Ubuntu is not shipping Plymouth AT ALL
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!
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 12:01 PM.
This seems like an excellent decision. I'd far rather a boot time ~10s than a fancy graphical boot.