linux tearing in the browser

If none of the more specific forums is the right place to ask

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby pylkko » 2020-07-16 08:12

MagicPoulp wrote:What rule restricts backports to the experimental repository?

I don't understand this question.

By the way, there is no e17 enlightenment 0.24 in experimental

https://packages.debian.org/source/experimental/e17
User avatar
pylkko
 
Posts: 1791
Joined: 2014-11-06 19:02

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby MagicPoulp » 2020-07-16 10:36

"It makes its way from Experimental to Debian testing."


Why? Why can't a formal backport be made from experimental?

OK I was looking at enlightenment, and now the package is named e17.
MagicPoulp
 
Posts: 383
Joined: 2018-11-05 21:30

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby stevepusser » 2020-07-17 02:36

The source is named e17, but Debian builds an enlightenment package from that source. Package names don't have to be the same as the source. Debian does seem to have remove the builds from the repo.

BTW, I'm backporting it on the OBS: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show ... ightenment

You're welcome. It consists of a jillion packages and libraries from efl, so add the repo and install from that if you want it--grabbing the deb only works for single-deb packages like my Pale Moon builds there.
Why? Why can't a formal backport be made from experimental?


Anyone can backport it, like me, but the packages won't be accepted into buster-backports until they make it into testing. That's policy. If my backports work well for you, that'll lend weight to a request for a formal backport on their mailing list once it makes it into testing.

As to preventing malware, backports should have only a few small changes to a few files in the debian folder. The original source tarballs are already in the Debian repo, and are not changed at all--you don't even upload them. And yes, those changes the backporter makes are examined and vetted.
MX Linux packager and developer
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 12075
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby MagicPoulp » 2020-07-17 06:19

OK thanks. Did you build it with all the flags for wayland?

And how can I trust you did not add a malware in it?

If I want to build my own e17, why would I use the experimental branch of debian, and not take the tar file from enlightenment's website?

Or even use that here:
https://www.enlightenment.org/docs/dist ... n-start.md
Last edited by MagicPoulp on 2020-07-17 13:01, edited 2 times in total.
MagicPoulp
 
Posts: 383
Joined: 2018-11-05 21:30

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby MagicPoulp » 2020-07-17 12:45

They claim that their engine is faster than GTK+ and QT.

https://www.enlightenment.org/about
"The core EFL libraries are much more efficient in both speed and size than their GTK+ and Qt equivalents, and have a smaller memory footprint."

And many embedded devices use e17:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... FL-ELC2016
MagicPoulp
 
Posts: 383
Joined: 2018-11-05 21:30

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby stevepusser » 2020-07-18 02:22

MagicPoulp wrote:OK thanks. Did you build it with all the flags for wayland?

And how can I trust you did not add a malware in it?

If I want to build my own e17, why would I use the experimental branch of debian, and not take the tar file from enlightenment's website?

Or even use that here:
https://www.enlightenment.org/docs/dist ... n-start.md


Wayland:: don't know, just whatever the Debian maintainer did is what you get. I didn't change anything of that nature.

If I wanted to distribute malware, I'd use my position as the lead packager for the popular MX Linux before I wasted time on one set of packages for you. Download and look at my debian folder and compare my orig source tarball with the one from Debian and the developer if you're paranoid. You can extract and compare the source file with a diff tool to see any changes. This is common knowledge, for pete's sake. The advantage of using the Debian and apt packaging tools is well known, so why should I have to explain it to you?

Or backport it yourself, I don't have time to deal with FAQs right now. There's a How-To here if you want to learn how to use the OBS to build the packages, though you should be somewhat familiar first with the Debian packaging system.
MX Linux packager and developer
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 12075
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby MagicPoulp » 2020-07-20 07:17

Why does MX Linux provides XFCE by default? XFCE is known for extra screen tearing. It would be nice to have enlightenment with wayland available, together with firefox configured for wayland and not xwayland.

I think it is interesting about security. Yes with time one can check if sources' checksums match, and if sources are enough peer reviewed. But I don't have time, even in the e17 repo.

I have worked at a telecom operator. They used Redhat Linux (quite expensive). It would be out of question to use something like Debian.
MagicPoulp
 
Posts: 383
Joined: 2018-11-05 21:30

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby stevepusser » 2020-07-21 00:01

MagicPoulp wrote:Why does MX Linux provides XFCE by default? XFCE is known for extra screen tearing. It would be nice to have enlightenment with wayland available, together with firefox configured for wayland and not xwayland.

I think it is interesting about security. Yes with time one can check if sources' checksums match, and if sources are enough peer reviewed. But I don't have time, even in the e17 repo.

I have worked at a telecom operator. They used Redhat Linux (quite expensive). It would be out of question to use something like Debian.

No tearing for me on MX's XFCE 4.14--XFCE added a syncing option in the compositor, and I also use the tearfree option in the Intel driver with the compton compositor. No tearing in XFCE, 4.12 or 4.14, Enlightenment, XFCE with compiz, or KDE Let me test MX-Fluxbox later. MX Tweak lets the user set tearfree in a GUI for the free drivers that support it, as well as for the pipeline composition tweak for the nonfree Nvidia driver. The default Intel modesetting driver that you get in both MX or Debian does not support tearfree, so the compositor has to do it for you.

We're working on an MX KDE version, though we have to use Buster's aging base. We do have some newer KDE apps in the repo, such as K3B and Kdenlive. The Trinity desktop devs are also interested in doing their own MX respin with the TDE desktop. Other users have also done their own respins with Mate, KDE, and other DEs...not a lot of interest in GNOME, for some reason.

Linux has tools that let you run diffs or file checksums quite quickly. I don't understand the issue myself.
MX Linux packager and developer
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 12075
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: linux tearing in the browser

Postby MagicPoulp » 2020-07-21 06:45

Sorry to be pedantic, but I think you mean intel firmware and not driver, or maybe both.

It is actually quite hard to produce the tearing in the CSS transition. One has to be very attentive. And I don't think you checked all the dektops you mention. But i belive you that you configured the compositors to be tearing free by definition.

"for some reason no interest in Gnome",
What are other's people reasons for not liking Gnome? FOr me it is the feeling and the annoying sounds when clicking menues. Otherwise, it seems to me quite clear that GTK (in C) that Gnome uses is superior to QT (C++) that KDE uses.

And I heard EFL would be faster than GTK, or would use less battery on devices. In the history of EFL, Samsung stopped enlarging the scope of Tizen for mobile devices because Google did not like it (bought Motorola, then made a deal with Samsung, etc).
MagicPoulp
 
Posts: 383
Joined: 2018-11-05 21:30

Previous

Return to General Questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

fashionable