Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Xfce 4.10 Desktop Feature Release

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,729

    Default

    It's moving to gtk3, and still claims to be light? Not that it wasn't already bloated for several years, but only getting worse.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Imouto View Post
    Yes they did it in 4.10.
    gtk 3.0 is planned for 4.12. [1]

    - Gilboa
    [1] http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4...er/029342.html
    DEV-NG: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB, GTX680, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711.
    DEV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 5x320GB, GTX550, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711 (^).
    SRV: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 4x2TB, 9800GTX, F20/x86-64, Dell U2412.
    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F20/x86_64.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    It's moving to gtk3, and still claims to be light? Not that it wasn't already bloated for several years, but only getting worse.
    Please post a link to benchmark that proves that gtk 3.0 is slower / more bloated than gtk 2.0 (or stop spreading mindless FUD).

    - Gilboa
    DEV-NG: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB, GTX680, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711.
    DEV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 5x320GB, GTX550, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711 (^).
    SRV: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 4x2TB, 9800GTX, F20/x86-64, Dell U2412.
    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F20/x86_64.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    96

    Default

    I was a KDE myself, however, lately I found that I'm not using
    many KDE apps, and that I could live with something lighter that
    with added Qt libraries. XFCE it was and at first I couldn't believe
    how fast apps started. It's not a fast machine (2 Ghz, 2GB ram),
    however KDE 4.6 was just too much for it.

    XFCE is a blessing. It's not a DIY, like a Fluxbox or E11, and it supports
    Gnome plugins. I considered LXDE, but XFCE is mature and good enough.
    If you had enough of wobblies and rotating cubes, clavko recommends.

  5. #15

    Default

    in the past XFCE was trying not to be GNOME2. is it now going to try to become GNOME2?

    also lets hope that 'alt-tab improvements' does not mean what the GNOME3 folks think.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilboa View Post
    Please post a link to benchmark that proves that gtk 3.0 is slower / more bloated than gtk 2.0 (or stop spreading mindless FUD).

    - Gilboa
    Every version of gtk3 so far has required XCB, which gtk2 does not. That's clear bloat.

    Note that upstream considers it a bug ( = should not need xcb), but that's the status quo still in 3.4.1. I have a bug open: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674465


    Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
    libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
    libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb

    I don't have benchmarks, I'm afraid. My definition of bloat is about size, a bloated app may still be faster than a lean one.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    they have support for gtk3 now iirc.
    the themes and the gtk-xfce4-enginge have been ported, but i think that the xfce applications are still useing gtk2.
    So? The KDE dudes also have GTK2 and GTK3 versions of their Oxygen widget themes. The question was, however, if Xfce was ported to GTK3 and the answer is no.

    Quote Originally Posted by mlux View Post
    XFCE gets more and more awesome. In contrast to the gnome team they actually respect wishes from their users. Seen long term I think XFCE has the potential to get most gnome users to switch.
    No GNOME user with half a brain would ever switch to an environment that never ever has bugfix releases. Roughly once a year there is a feature release and in between not a single bugfix is released to its users whereas in GNOME and KDE land users get monthly bugfix releases until six months later a new feature release is made (in contrast to Xfces 18 months).
    And why would a happy GNOME 2 user switch to a DE that after years is still playing catchup with GNOME 2? Xfce 4.0 was released in 2003 and moved from a CDE clone to a GNOME 2 clone. Cinnamon manages to do new releases way quicker. I expect GNOME 2 fans to either adapt to GNOME 3 switch to Cinnamon, Unity or Plasma Desktop.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Every version of gtk3 so far has required XCB, which gtk2 does not. That's clear bloat.

    Note that upstream considers it a bug ( = should not need xcb), but that's the status quo still in 3.4.1. I have a bug open: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674465


    Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
    libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
    libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb

    I don't have benchmarks, I'm afraid. My definition of bloat is about size, a bloated app may still be faster than a lean one.
    You *got* to be kidding me.
    XFCE is bad (??!?!) because of a redundant (?) dependency that requires an additional 3.3MB (!!!), and this, within an DE that weights in at (at least on Fedora 16) ~38 MB (well over 40MB with dependencies).

    Once word: IceWM.

    - Gilboa
    DEV-NG: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB, GTX680, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711.
    DEV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 5x320GB, GTX550, F20/x86_64, Dell U2711 (^).
    SRV: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 4x2TB, 9800GTX, F20/x86-64, Dell U2412.
    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F20/x86_64.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Then there's the size. Comparing gtk3 3.4.1 and gtk2 2.24.8:
    libgdk.so 595kb - 455kb
    libgtk.so 4.3mb - 3.8mb
    You are comparing 2 different libraries: if you compare libgtk-x11-2.0.so (gtk2) and libgtk-3.so (gtk3) you'll see there is not much difference in size. Same for the 2 gdk libraries (in fact there is the gtk3 version 30% smaller). Nonetheless this says nothing, the library size has no relation to the actual memory usage.

    The port of gtk3 to xcb is a good thing, libx11 is evil in many ways and xcb is its successor that tries to resolve many of the libx11 [locking] issues.

    About Xfce and Gtk3 it is fairly simple: there are plans to port the code to gtk3 and in a perfect world you wouldn't see _any_ difference between the gtk2 and gtk3 applications. That said the biggest issue holding us off from porting is theming. During the gtk3 releases a number of times the css theming in gtk changed, making it hard to get good working themes.

    So in the next couple of days a discussion will start about which gtk3 version Xfce requires to get decent (comparable to gtk2) theming, if all required functionality is there etc. In case it will be a step back from gtk2: no gtk3 in Xfce 4.12, otherwise porting will start in separate branches until everything works.

    The truth about gtk3 is that is has no visible gain for the average user, so IMHO highly overrated. From the development point of view it's a lot of work and because the policy changed after gtk2 (regarding deprecated api removal) it will in the future often lead to problems [because Xfce has a slower development cycle than GNOME].

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
    No GNOME user with half a brain would ever switch to an environment that never ever has bugfix releases. Roughly once a year there is a feature release and in between not a single bugfix is released to its users whereas in GNOME and KDE land users get monthly bugfix releases until six months later a new feature release is made (in contrast to Xfce’s 18 months).
    And why would a happy GNOME 2 user switch to a DE that after years is still playing catchup with GNOME 2? Xfce 4.0 was released in 2003 and moved from a CDE clone to a GNOME 2 clone. Cinnamon manages to do new releases way quicker. I expect GNOME 2 fans to either adapt to GNOME 3 switch to Cinnamon, Unity or Plasma Desktop.
    Just to inform: Xfce has a different release model then KDE and GNOME (and probably any other desktops). Because the development team is small (3 active developers), we decided that making stable release consumes too much time. So instead we make 1 stable release each year (time permitting, so 4.10 was ~4 months late), containing libxfce4uti-4.10.0, thunar-1.4.0 etcetc..
    After that we only make stable releases of individual packages: so the latest Xfce 4.8 versions are xfce4-dev-tools-4.8.0 (same as in the 4.8 bulk release), xfce4-panel-4.8.6 (6 stable releases after 4.8.0 which was in the 4.8 release), xfce4-settings-4.8.3 (3 releases after 4.8) etcetc.

    The single stable release consumes 10 minutes, a full stable release almost a day. I think the the last year Xfce made over 40 individual stable releases (for the desktop-critical packages), where as GNOME and KDE maybe had 10 full-stable releases. Both models work fine, but the latter requires a lot more effort (which Xfce doesn't have).

    http://www.xfce.org/about/releasemodel

Posting Permissions

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