Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 114

Thread: BSDs Struggle With Open-Source Graphics Drivers

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,694

    Default BSDs Struggle With Open-Source Graphics Drivers

    Phoronix: BSDs Struggle With Open-Source Graphics Drivers

    While there's plenty of code pouring into the Linux world for bettering open-source graphics drivers from desktop graphics cards to ARM SoCs, in the *BSD world they are struggling with their graphics driver support. Matthieu Herrb gave a presentation on the (rather poor) state of graphics on Unix-like platforms outside of Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI5Njk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1

    Default Wayland does NOT depend on KMS!

    Wayland will also be a mess for BSD and Solaris operating systems due to its dependence on kernel mode-setting, kernel input drivers, and Weston being designed with solely Linux in mind.

    THIS IS NOT TRUE. I was afraid of that myself and expressed my fear on planetkde and here is what I got as an answer from Martin Grlin (I am pretty sure he knows what he is talking about!):

    @P.Jay: "So with Wayland depending on KMS I see big problems coming."
    and Wayland does not depend on KMS. QtWayland runs on the raspberry pi - proprietary driver, no KMS and still: it works. Wayland is just a protocol to exchange buffers.

    You are not the only one getting it wrong, there is lots of FUD around Wayland especially as people get confused about what Wayland allows and what Weston (reference implementation of a Wayland compositor) requires.

    I don't see any reason why Wayland should not work with NVIDIA's driver and personally I'm sure that the driver already supports it in the NVIDIA labs.
    source: http://aseigo.blogspot.co.at/2013/02/a-release.html

    So please stop spreading that FUD!

    On a side note: I see a bright future for FreeBSD with the upcoming 10 release. The FreeBSD foundation exceeded it's funding goal of 500.000k USD by more than 50% (Where was the news about that?! Source: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/) and there are some awesome features coming up (the new package manager looks amazing and imho beats everything to ground Linux has to offer). I am pretty sure, when time comes, those things will get sorted out. Don't get me wrong, I also use Linux everyday and like it very much. But I also loved the BSD's and want them to succeed as well!

    Best wishes,
    Pj

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by P.Jay View Post
    On a side note: I see a bright future for FreeBSD with the upcoming 10 release.
    What BullShit
    No one cares about BSD anymore. The make up only 1% of all open-source operating systems (even though they should not be considered open source) and that number is decreasing.

    The FreeBSD foundation exceeded it's funding goal of 500.000k USD by more than 50% (Where was the news about that?! Source: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/)
    And all the funding came from proprietary software companies like apple and microsoft so they can later convert BSD code intro proprietary software and not give any back.

    and there are some awesome features coming up (the new package manager looks amazing and imho beats everything to ground Linux has to offer).
    You mean the useless piece of shit called "pkgng" which they tried to copied from linux? That shit doesn't even have repositories and according to disgruntled FreeBSD users, the packages conflicts with the ports tree and in fact many FreeBSD users what to switch back to the old pkg_tools(Source: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=37203). So pkgng? Total shit hole.

    I am pretty sure, when time comes, those things will get sorted out.
    The point is they'll get it sorted in 5 years time and by that Linux has moved far ahead.

    Don't get me wrong, I also use Linux everyday and like it very much. But I also loved the BSD's and want them to succeed as well!
    Good that you use Linux always put all your support behind it. Putting support behind BSD is like helping the enermy. This is important as BSD's goal is to eliminate linux and help M$ and CrApple so Linux and BSD can't co-exist. One must go and the best option is BSD should go.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by systemd rulez View Post
    What BullShit
    No one cares about BSD anymore. The make up only 1% of all open-source operating systems (even though they should not be considered open source) and that number is decreasing.



    And all the funding came from proprietary software companies like apple and microsoft so they can later convert BSD code intro proprietary software and not give any back.



    You mean the useless piece of shit called "pkgng" which they tried to copied from linux? That shit doesn't even have repositories and according to disgruntled FreeBSD users, the packages conflicts with the ports tree and in fact many FreeBSD users what to switch back to the old pkg_tools(Source: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=37203). So pkgng? Total shit hole.



    The point is they'll get it sorted in 5 years time and by that Linux has moved far ahead.



    Good that you use Linux always put all your support behind it. Putting support behind BSD is like helping the enermy. This is important as BSD's goal is to eliminate linux and help M$ and CrApple so Linux and BSD can't co-exist. One must go and the best option is BSD should go.
    With 10 years of daily Debian Linux Sid I have seen progress and it has been in the form of well over $10 Billion in Corporate Investment into Linux and guess what?

    X-Windows, Compositing, etc., are a decade behind OS X. Garbage design from day one. This reminds me of the wars of XFree86 back when Openstep and Display Postscript and WindowServer ran circles around the MIT X-Windows world.

    Quartz and Quartz-Extreme replace the Display Postscript with Display PDF and present day OS X 10.8 has OpenGL 3.2 throughout the entire system, while Linux continues to piss itself and slowly get OpenGL 2.1 compliance for KDE, and later on OpenGL 3.x and OpenGL ES 3.0 all once again to Corporate Sponsorship.

    Well, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and the likes have all fully embraced LLVM/Clang and are making their products fully available to FreeBSD and anyone else adopting the LLVM/Clang infrastructure.

    Whether it's Oracle, IBM, RedHat, Intel, Nvidia, AMD, you name it it appears that no matter amount of cash spent on Linux and it's graphics subsystems ever seems to produce a clean, robust and scalable solution. There is nothing but duct tape everywhere.

    Wayland is an attempt to bring the windowing system more in line with it's modern leader from Apple.

    And yet, somehow with pissant resources for FreeBSD you guys throw shit at it like it's insignificant for the end user.

    From what I am seeing, you pour a few billion into FreeBSD's needs and it'll run circles around Linux and the Gnome/KDE Linux centric user base in a fraction of the time it has taken for Linux to get out of its own way.

    Hell, when Debian is making their entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and FreeBSD ready you know shit is happening in the Linux world that people are getting sick of and your types of rants epitomize it to the core.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    With 10 years of daily Debian Linux Sid I have seen progress and it has been in the form of well over $10 Billion in Corporate Investment into Linux and guess what?

    X-Windows, Compositing, etc., are a decade behind OS X. Garbage design from day one. This reminds me of the wars of XFree86 back when Openstep and Display Postscript and WindowServer ran circles around the MIT X-Windows world.
    The irony. FreeBSD's exceeded it's funding target and yet they latest release (9.1) came 6 moinths late and WITHOUT BINARY PACKAGES, they even haven't been able to recover their project servers from the security incident in November, and they still have outdated, old, slow and poorly designed code and OS that had never been fix for their entire 30 years of existent. What a shit group of masturbators... I mean developers.

    Make people wonder what they are doing with the money. Oh that's right they are spending it all on beer and wisket for their conferences in which they spread lies and FUD.

    Linux on the other hand has made huge improvements to graphics, stable, security, drivers and yes KMS. Because Debian uses old software, those improvements haven't come to you yet so using Debian shows that your statement has no credibility.

    Quartz and Quartz-Extreme replace the Display Postscript with Display PDF and present day OS X 10.8 has OpenGL 3.2 throughout the entire system, while Linux continues to piss itself and slowly get OpenGL 2.1 compliance for KDE, and later on OpenGL 3.x and OpenGL ES 3.0 all once again to Corporate Sponsorship.
    That's OpenGL's problem, they are being asshole and don't want to treat Linux fairly cause they know they'll be pressed to open source thier projects.

    Well, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and the likes have all fully embraced LLVM/Clang and are making their products fully available to FreeBSD and anyone else adopting the LLVM/Clang infrastructure.
    All but one(Nvidia) of those device makers don't even support BSD and never will cause it's meaningless to do so. Linux is far more meaningful thus they'll continue to support Linux for the long run which is important for them as desktop Linux is on the rise.

    Whether it's Oracle, IBM, RedHat, Intel, Nvidia, AMD, you name it it appears that no matter amount of cash spent on Linux and it's graphics subsystems ever seems to produce a clean, robust and scalable solution. There is nothing but duct tape everywhere.
    Ah yes, the classic BSD argument against BSD: "Linux's a mess, Linux's a set of cheap hacks, Linux's bloated, Linux's becoming like Microsoft etc, all BullShit"

    Linux is the most beautiful assembly of code there is, it's light, it's fast, it has clean code, it's extendable and most importantly, it's portable (far more then useless NetBSD). FreeBSD by contrast has a kernel thats heavy, messy, outdtae, ugly and so unportable. That's why Debian kFreeBSD can only exist on i386 and amd64 while Linux versions go all the way from x86 to phones to embedded devices etc.

    Wayland is an attempt to bring the windowing system more in line with it's modern leader from Apple.
    Wayland is an effort to fix the mess created by the X11 devs on X. The difference that Wayland has is simplicity of the design taking the pressure off maintainers. There's nothing about competing like Apple or M$. BSD is not having a share of this pie not because it was made for Linux only no. They don't have Wayland cause of thier bigotness and resentment at teh fact that Wayland was designed by a Linux developer not BSD and so they decide to forgo a feature that is clearly benificial in the long run out of pride and bigotness: " Oh boohoo... We think we so good and all things created by Linux devs are shit". The same can be said for udev and systemd.

    And yet, somehow with pissant resources for FreeBSD you guys throw shit at it like it's insignificant for the end user.
    BSD insignificant for everything (even servers and gay porn surfing computers).

    From what I am seeing, you pour a few billion into FreeBSD's needs and it'll run circles around Linux and the Gnome/KDE Linux centric user base in a fraction of the time it has taken for Linux to get out of its own way.
    No, you pour a few billion into FreeBSD and Apple and M$ will become even more powerful then what they are if the money went to linux and GPL code instead.

    Hell, when Debian is making their entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and FreeBSD ready you know shit is happening
    Debian will probably abondon making thier entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and kFreeBSD as GCC and Linux does an excellent job and it's just a waste of time to put any attention to Clang or kFreeBSD as GCC and Linux are superior.

    in the Linux world that people are getting sick of and your types of rants epitomize it to the core.
    Why don't you look at your most recent post. It looks like a FUD spreading anti-Linux rant by a brainwashed troll.
    Last edited by systemd rulez; 02-09-2013 at 12:08 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Well, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and the likes have all fully embraced LLVM/Clang and are making their products fully available to FreeBSD and anyone else adopting the LLVM/Clang infrastructure. -- Whether it's Oracle, IBM, RedHat, Intel, Nvidia, AMD, you name it it appears that no matter amount of cash spent on Linux and it's graphics subsystems ever seems to produce a clean, robust and scalable solution. There is nothing but duct tape everywhere.
    Seriously, what the fuck? What does compile infrastucture have to do with a display servers and compositors? I'm not sure if you have noticed that Linux dominates on servers, embedded systems and mobile. None of which need or use X.org (for the most part). For the companies you mentioned desktop matters only to the few. ...and Intel, AMD and Nvidia making the "products fully available" on FreeBSD? Are talking only about LLVM/Clang because AMD and Intel doesn't provide any(?) (graphics) drivers for BSDs. Companies like Google (the second largest contributor to the project) do not work on LLVM/Clang to improve it on FreeBSD but rather make it more suitable for their Linux work. I don't see the connection between LLVM/Clang and FreeBSD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    From what I am seeing, you pour a few billion into FreeBSD's needs and it'll run circles around Linux and the Gnome/KDE Linux centric user base in a fraction of the time it has taken for Linux to get out of its own way.
    Yes because like in this case they don't actually have to write the stuff themselves when they can port it over from Linux...

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Hell, when Debian is making their entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and FreeBSD ready you know shit is happening in the Linux world that people are getting sick of and your types of rants epitomize it to the core.
    Excuse me, what? FreeBSD moved away from GCC because it moved to GPLv3 licence and meanwhile LLVM/Clang matured to the point it was better choise than the old version of GCC. Debian is doing that because they can and generally want to provide as much choise as possible.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    With 10 years of daily Debian Linux Sid I have seen progress and it has been in the form of well over $10 Billion in Corporate Investment into Linux and guess what?

    X-Windows, Compositing, etc., are a decade behind OS X. Garbage design from day one.
    Garbage? How is garbage so extensible that it still can be made to work relatively easily with a bit of work? If you say that the anti tearing stuff canonical does or the gpu switching stuff red hat does is too late, I would absolutely agree, but it doesn't seem to be X.org's fault. What exactly does it make such "garbage"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Quartz and Quartz-Extreme replace the Display Postscript with Display PDF and present day OS X 10.8 has OpenGL 3.2 throughout the entire system,
    You should mention that that's the highest opengl version the drivers support. If you talk about something being "behind", this should be it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    while Linux continues to piss itself and slowly get OpenGL 2.1 compliance for KDE, and later on OpenGL 3.x and OpenGL ES 3.0 all once again to Corporate Sponsorship.
    What do you mean with "OpenGL 2.1 compliance for KDE"? kwin only uses opengl 2 shaders for the effects, so what? Do you have an actual problem with something? At least linux allows third party drivers from amd and nvidia with OpenGL 4.3 support...

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Whether it's Oracle, IBM, RedHat, Intel, Nvidia, AMD, you name it it appears that no matter amount of cash spent on Linux and it's graphics subsystems ever seems to produce a clean, robust and scalable solution. There is nothing but duct tape everywhere.
    For AMD's and nvidia's proprietary drivers, maybe. Can you expand a bit on why the rest is not "clean", "robust" or "scalable"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    From what I am seeing, you pour a few billion into FreeBSD's needs and it'll run circles around Linux and the Gnome/KDE Linux centric user base in a fraction of the time it has taken for Linux to get out of its own way.
    So you are saying that the good developers all go to freebsd instead to linux? Or why should that be the case?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    Hell, when Debian is making their entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and FreeBSD ready you know shit is happening in the Linux world that people are getting sick of and your types of rants epitomize it to the core.
    I think it's more about giving user's a choice and maybe a bit "because we can". How many people do you know actually use it? As far as I'm aware gcc still produces a bit better binaries than clang/llvm and linux has a bit better performance than the freebsd kernel in many use cases. Maybe that changes in the future, who knows.

    But don't pretend llvm/clang is like a hobby project that is soon to be better than gcc that is supposedly funded with billions. As far as I know clang/llvm also has some major supporters and funding, e.g. Apple.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    126

    Unhappy Sad

    I find that it's really sad we are arguing with each other, communities of Alternative Operating Systems need to pull together and stop fighting. I don't know if any of you realized it yet, but you got Microsoft riding all our backs trying hard to pull some 007 stuff on us and wipe us out. Fighting each other only gives them more hope that we will be destroyed.

    And yes, BSD has some real issues and I think it comes with the territory, meaning Linux is quickly rising and BSD seems to of lost out quite a bit. It's sad, but what you BSD guys need to do is assess the situation on your end and embark on some workarounds. Put your heads together, I believe you can do it. Losing a member of the Free Software community would be a bad thing, I wish you all the best of luck.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    With 10 years of daily Debian Linux Sid I have seen progress and it has been in the form of well over $10 Billion in Corporate Investment into Linux and guess what?
    X-Windows, Compositing, etc., are a decade behind OS X. Garbage design from day one. This reminds me of the wars of XFree86 back when Openstep and Display Postscript and WindowServer ran circles around the MIT X-Windows world.
    Quartz and Quartz-Extreme replace the Display Postscript with Display PDF and present day OS X 10.8 has OpenGL 3.2 throughout the entire system, while Linux continues to piss itself and slowly get OpenGL 2.1 compliance for KDE, and later on OpenGL 3.x and OpenGL ES 3.0 all once again to Corporate Sponsorship.
    Wayland is an attempt to bring the windowing system more in line with it's modern leader from Apple.
    Hell, when Debian is making their entire archive LLVM/Clang ready and FreeBSD ready you know shit is happening in the Linux world that people are getting sick of and your types of rants epitomize it to the core.
    X-Windows has all features what I need. I don't need compositing nonsense or crappy Wayland.
    Latest Intel GPUs support OpenGL 3.x on Linux.
    Debian developers can do what they want. Users don't have to use crap.

    I think we can all agree on one thing: this forum is in serious need of moderation
    No, we don't need North Korea on this forum.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    X-Windows has all features what I need. I don't need compositing nonsense or crappy Wayland.
    Latest Intel GPUs support OpenGL 3.x on Linux.
    Debian developers can do what they want. Users don't have to use crap.


    No, we don't need North Korea on this forum.
    Mabye today, but tomorrow when it's be more and more work to port new software. It's not like it exist any big bsd desktop development today.
    As I understand it solaris has already mostly everything to run wayland. If they also switch you get even less collaboration from other project.

Posting Permissions

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