Is Compiz On Its Deathbed?

[leigh123linux]

Well, compiz isn't dead over here ~ but then again, I don't use Fedora

By your bug report, clearly you knew how to fix the problem ~ why didn't you just submit a patch, then? (or even just create/use the patch yourself, when making your compiz packages?).

I mean not every distro does things the same. (that being said, yeah, i agree it should be fixed)...But i still don't see that as a huge issue.... On Archlinux (as an example), i often have to modify sources/or export which version of python to use (python2 or python(3)... ). I don't see your packaging problem, being any bigger of a deal than that. It takes less than a minute to create and apply a patch, or write a fix using 'sed' to modify the 2 lines, mentioned in your report.

cheers

I did but upstream never responded.

[leigh123linux]

Well, compiz isn't dead over here ~ but then again, I don't use Fedora

By your bug report, clearly you knew how to fix the problem ~ why didn't you just submit a patch, then? (or even just create/use the patch yourself, when making your compiz packages?).

I mean not every distro does things the same. (that being said, yeah, i agree it should be fixed)...But i still don't see that as a huge issue.... On Archlinux (as an example), i often have to modify sources/or export which version of python to use (python2 or python(3)... ). I don't see your packaging problem, being any bigger of a deal than that. It takes less than a minute to create and apply a patch, or write a fix using 'sed' to modify the 2 lines, mentioned in your report.

cheers

Try learning to read (perhaps your blind or just out to pick a fight, well fuck you to) or did you miss the patch on that report.



--- a/cmake/LibCompizConfigCommon.cmake
+++ b/cmake/LibCompizConfigCommon.cmake
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ function (compizconfig_backend bname)

set_target_properties (
${bname} PROPERTIES
- INSTALL_RPATH "${COMPIZCONFIG_LIBDIR}"
+ INSTALL_RPATH "${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/lib"
COMPILE_FLAGS "${${_BACKEND}_CFLAGSADD}"
LINK_FLAGS "${${_BACKEND}_LDFLAGSADD}"
)
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ function (compizconfig_backend bname)

install (
TARGETS ${bname}
- DESTINATION
${COMPIZ_DESTDIR}${COMPIZCONFIG_LIBDIR}/compizconfig/backends
+ DESTINATION
${COMPIZ_DESTDIR}${CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX}/lib/compizconfig/backends
)

if (NOT _COMPIZCONFIG_INTERNAL)

[ninez]

Well this is the very reason why it is "dying" i.e a compositor should be part of the desktop environment to be well integrated. That's why kwin and mutter (gnome-shell) are now used. Unity is in the same booth. Basically the idea of having a desktop agnostic window-manager and compositor failed.

I don't think that is necessarily true. #1 KDE and Gnome aren't the only DE's around, or in use. #2 not everyone is happy with GnomeShell (myself, included - i'll never use it...) and there are still people using Compiz with KDE. #3 Compiz can be used with the vast majority of DEs (mutter can do this too, but Kwin is less portable, as it would require installing KDE stuff). #4 some people use compiz as 'standalone' and just start whatever panel, file-manager, etc on boot. ~ I would hardly call that a failure, Compiz can and is being used in a variety of ways.

For numbers #2-3-4 - Compiz is anything but a failure. I would actually call it more of a success.

The 'integrated compositor' is *only* a success, if you (the user) are happy with your 'integrated compositor'. Some people obviously aren't happy with them though... ie: GnomeShell/mutter was dropped from being the default DE/WM in the most popular distro (Ubuntu) and GnomeShell/mutter was also forked...IMO that doesn't translate into 'success'... Personally, I opted out of Gnome-Shell (with gnome3) because in reality ~ i was left with very basic functionality (from a compositing window manager perspective), and a DE/WM that wasn't even usable for the types of things, that i have.

I think Kwin largely has been a great success, but that is the only 'integrated compositor', that i think of as a success, *for linux desktops* anyway.

my 2 cents

[ninez]

Try learning to read (perhaps your blind or just out to pick a fight, well fuck you to) or did you miss the patch on that report.

I wasn't out to pick a fight. i looked at your bug report a couple of days ago (whenever, you first posted the link), but didn't reply until today. Obviously, I forgot that the patch was there. *My bad* -> but, way to go off into the deep end, like someone just insulted your mom!

Regardless of that, it would've been very trivial at best, to package compiz anyway. Which was kind of my point, in that post.

So you can fuck yourself, wanker!

[drago01]

Personally, I opted out of Gnome-Shell (with gnome3) because in reality ~ i was left with very basic functionality (from a compositing window manager perspective)

What exactly did you miss? Just more effects? Starting with 3.4 effects like wobbly windows etc. can be done via extensions.

[ninez]

What exactly did you miss? Just more effects? Starting with 3.4 effects like wobbly windows etc. can be done via extensions.

Nah, i hate wobbly windows and i'm not big on transitional effects, i try to use them mildly and tastefully. However (as a side note) i do like gaussion blur and transparency, which i get with compiz. ( ihaven't seen blur on GS, i don't think). I generally use those for pop-ups, menus, etc.

For me, it is things like assignable hot/corners-edges for each/any plugin. ~ In particular, i use this feature with both 'Expo' and 'Scale'...

I prefer Expo for managing applications across workspaces, over using 'Activities' view. Partially, to do with liking static workspaces (yes i know about the extension), partially because IMO Expo is a better way to view workspaces, ie: i prefer the layout, and partially to do with the fact that i find 'Activities' to be distracting, and overkill. I persoanlly think both Compiz and MacOSX got managing workspaces right, but Gnome? not so much.

I prefer Compiz' 'scale' plugin (&& scale-addons) for things like 'natural view' ( it maps app window based on workspace position). which i find to be very useful.

'Place' plugin, i also use. Being as i use gestures (via easystrok) to open apps (via stylus stoke), i often want the app to open right where my pointer is, while for others (like firefox) i always want it to open dead-center.

There's others too, but i don't need to go into every plugin, here. I can sum it all up by saying that i prefer the flexibility, and granular control of compiz (via CCSM). It performance is also reasonable, and i don't experience problems with it, that i do with both GS/mutter and Cinnamon. (like a bunch of xruns, when opening activites / or scale in cinnamon).

There's also been some great fixes for compiz in the last couple of weeks, the 2 that i noticed right away, was the nvidia fix and the cpu fix. The former being visually noticable in the odd situation...and the latter being a reduction of CPU usage by compiz, by like 40-50% on my system.

anyway, GS isn't my cup of tea and regardless it causes xruns on my (proaudio) system, which means it isn't usable.

[liam]

Nah, i hate wobbly windows and i'm not big on transitional effects, i try to use them mildly and tastefully. However (as a side note) i do like gaussion blur and transparency, which i get with compiz. ( ihaven't seen blur on GS, i don't think). I generally use those for pop-ups, menus, etc.

For me, it is things like assignable hot/corners-edges for each/any plugin. ~ In particular, i use this feature with both 'Expo' and 'Scale'...

I prefer Expo for managing applications across workspaces, over using 'Activities' view. Partially, to do with liking static workspaces (yes i know about the extension), partially because IMO Expo is a better way to view workspaces, ie: i prefer the layout, and partially to do with the fact that i find 'Activities' to be distracting, and overkill. I persoanlly think both Compiz and MacOSX got managing workspaces right, but Gnome? not so much.

I prefer Compiz' 'scale' plugin (&& scale-addons) for things like 'natural view' ( it maps app window based on workspace position). which i find to be very useful.

'Place' plugin, i also use. Being as i use gestures (via easystrok) to open apps (via stylus stoke), i often want the app to open right where my pointer is, while for others (like firefox) i always want it to open dead-center.

There's others too, but i don't need to go into every plugin, here. I can sum it all up by saying that i prefer the flexibility, and granular control of compiz (via CCSM). It performance is also reasonable, and i don't experience problems with it, that i do with both GS/mutter and Cinnamon. (like a bunch of xruns, when opening activites / or scale in cinnamon).

There's also been some great fixes for compiz in the last couple of weeks, the 2 that i noticed right away, was the nvidia fix and the cpu fix. The former being visually noticable in the odd situation...and the latter being a reduction of CPU usage by compiz, by like 40-50% on my system.

anyway, GS isn't my cup of tea and regardless it causes xruns on my (proaudio) system, which means it isn't usable.

Hey ninez,

Since you are having these problems consistently, you might want to let the main GS guys know. I'm sure they'd want to accomodate usage like yours.

Best/Liam

[drago01]

Nah, i hate wobbly windows and i'm not big on transitional effects, i try to use them mildly and tastefully. However (as a side note) i do like gaussion blur and transparency, which i get with compiz. ( ihaven't seen blur on GS, i don't think). I generally use those for pop-ups, menus, etc.

For me, it is things like assignable hot/corners-edges for each/any plugin. ~ In particular, i use this feature with both 'Expo' and 'Scale'...

I prefer Expo for managing applications across workspaces, over using 'Activities' view. Partially, to do with liking static workspaces (yes i know about the extension), partially because IMO Expo is a better way to view workspaces, ie: i prefer the layout, and partially to do with the fact that i find 'Activities' to be distracting, and overkill. I persoanlly think both Compiz and MacOSX got managing workspaces right, but Gnome? not so much.

OSX Lion does use dynamic workspace just like GNOME3 (you can just configure that starting amount) .... basically "Mission Control" is very similar to the Overview in GNOME3.

I prefer Compiz' 'scale' plugin (&& scale-addons) for things like 'natural view' ( it maps app window based on workspace position). which i find to be very useful.

https://extensions.gnome.org/extensi...dow-placement/

There's others too, but i don't need to go into every plugin, here. I can sum it all up by saying that i prefer the flexibility, and granular control of compiz (via CCSM). It performance is also reasonable, and i don't experience problems with it, that i do with both GS/mutter and Cinnamon. (like a bunch of xruns, when opening activites / or scale in cinnamon).

There's also been some great fixes for compiz in the last couple of weeks, the 2 that i noticed right away, was the nvidia fix and the cpu fix. The former being visually noticable in the odd situation...and the latter being a reduction of CPU usage by compiz, by like 40-50% on my system.

anyway, GS isn't my cup of tea and regardless it causes xruns on my (proaudio) system, which means it isn't usable.

There is no reason at all why mutter would be slower then compiz (on my system it isn't) but in case it is (to the point causing xruns) that's just a bug (if you have a reproduce able case please file it, I'll look at it.)

http://blog.fishsoup.net/2011/06/13/...r-performance/ does not have any recent fixes but compiz did not look to good in this testing.

[una.szplodrmann]

Basically the idea of having a desktop agnostic window-manager and compositor failed.

If this is the case, then politics may be the cause, rather than Compiz failing to offer integration with a variety of desktop environments. There was ready-made, modular system that could have been built upon... Buts thats GNU/Linux, eh; where would the 'ecosystem' be without constantly reinventing the wheel.

Did I mention Pulseaudio? /slapme

[ninez]

OSX Lion does use dynamic workspace just like GNOME3 (you can just configure that starting amount) .... basically "Mission Control" is very similar to the Overview in GNOME3.

I'm not really a big fan of mission control, i think it is overkill as well. X4 or X8 workspaces, static and either gnome-pie, terminal or dock to launch apps. That is all that i need. I don't need some giant glorified menu.

https://extensions.gnome.org/extensi...dow-placement/

I'll have a look at it, i hadn't seen this one yet. But that still only covers one little piece of the puzzle, if it works as well...

There is no reason at all why mutter would be slower then compiz (on my system it isn't) but in case it is (to the point causing xruns) that's just a bug (if you have a reproduce able case please file it, I'll look at it.)

http://blog.fishsoup.net/2011/06/13/...r-performance/ does not have any recent fixes but compiz did not look to good in this testing.

Really, you're going to post Owen Taylor's (creator of mutter) benchmarks from last year?! ~ I am have (current day) mutter and Compiz both right in front of me and i can easily see for myself which works better for me/my system/hardware... I don't need to look at old (IMO potentially biased) benchmarks.