"When you ask about X11 support within the GPU drivers or even Wayland they'll often look blankly at you and wonder why anybody would want to do anything else than Android based systems. And when you go into details they'll either tell you it can't be done - or charge you a massive cost to have it done."
Yes, that's the sick reality with manufacturers. In order to break it, someone needs to set a successful trend. Let's hope Jolla will do it with Sailfish. There is some hope that Tegra eventually would get production ready open source drivers that will enable Wayland natively there, without any translation of glibc.
Earlier this year however, I discovered that a well-known company had taken the code - disappeared underground with it for several months, improved upon it, utilized the capability in their advertisements and demos and in the end posted the code utilizing their own source control system, detached from any state of that of the upstream project's. Even to the extent some posters around the web thought libhybris was done by that company itself.
That kind of behavior ruined the initial reason I open sourced libhybris in the first place and I was shocked to the point that I contemplated to by default not open source my hobby projects any more. It's not cool for companies to do things like this, no matter your commercial reasons. It ruins it for all of us who want to strengthen the open source ecosystem. We could have really used your improvements and patches earlier on instead of struggling with some of these issues.
Gee, I wonder who that could've been... /s
Originally Posted by
But, I will say that their behavior has improved - they are now participating in the project, discussing, upstreaming patches that are useful. And I forgive them because they've changed their ways and are participating sanely now.
Hmm, lets hope so, their track-record in other areas of the F/OSS stack over the yrs doesn't leave me with lots of confidence
You know, even I thought it was Canonical that was able to utilize Android's SurfaceFlinger graphics stack, for their "not so distro".
The thing I love about the Ubuntu for Phones is that:
- It uses the Android kernel (which is not the Linux kernel, but pretty close)
- Theoretically supports all ICS Android devices (as long as clean and compatible CM ROM)
- Unity GUI is really maturing (its finger friendly and not as confusing as PlasmaActive)
The thing I hate about u4p:
- Unity... seriously we need a proper KDE GUI, even if its a clone of iOS (most basic), Android (from MIUI to AOKP, they're pretty good), or something like WebOS / PlayBook OS.
- chroot. Seriously? Going from one form of emulation to another doesn't solve anything. In fact, Google's emulation is hundred times better than Canonicals.
- Doesn't solve the problem.... this is not "nix on a fone", its not even Ubuntu
- ....after reading stskeep's post, man I feel bad. And I'm furious at Canonical for taking all the credit for something they didn't do.
Future Implications:
- Hoping that libhybris will be utilized !
- " Mer " could be cleaned, smoothed out and made to work with libhybris on Android devices
- A project such as " Mer " can come to a Beta-Beta stage (everything works, Chrome/Firefox browser installed, great UI something like a cross between AOKP-and-QNX, basics are implemented such as File Browser, Phone, Messaging, Contacts, Calculator, Notepad, Camera, Media Player with new gui to be finger friendly, perhaps the only thing lacking is an "App Store" but you could browse the repos and just install the software)
- A popular Android device can be bought (NOTE 3) -> It can be r00ted -> Custom Cyanogenmod Kernel and ROM can be installed -> custom recovery (dualboot option) -> " Mer " can be installed -> enjoy!
edit: Yes, chroot isn't emulation. Its an independant runtime environment. However, due to the way its composed it runs above the Android system. So it does get hit by performance issues, despite whatever anyone says. Surely not as bad as actual emulation, but its far from the 'nix on desktop. I don't think it runs faster than Dalvik, actually it runs slower. Here's an illustration, think of chroot "running natively" on the blue section... far removed from the system. I haven't even touched on the delay you get from loading this on a microSD card which are slower than NAND/SSD on devices. Or the fact that the information relays both ways, so that delay is multiplied twice. Have I confused you yet? Yeah, so its not really far removed from emulation when I refer it as emulation (and I'll continue to say so to point out how inferior this approach is compared to a native installation).
edit: Yes, chroot isn't emulation. Its an independant runtime environment. However, due to the way its composed it runs above the Android system. So it does get hit by performance issues, despite whatever anyone says. Surely not as bad as actual emulation, but its far from the 'nix on desktop. I don't think it runs faster than Dalvik, actually it runs slower. Here's an illustration, think of chroot "running natively" on the blue section... far removed from the system. I haven't even touched on the delay you get from loading this on a microSD card which are slower than NAND/SSD on devices. Or the fact that the information relays both ways, so that delay is multiplied twice. Have I confused you yet? Yeah, so its not really far removed from emulation when I refer it as emulation (and I'll continue to say so to point out how inferior this approach is compared to a native installation).
You still don't get it. Do more research and please stop making things up.
