Tiling: Add fallback path for the first Polonium tile. Commit. Fixes bug #488898

I’m a little bit surprised or confused here. Polonium is an external script. KDE/Kwin specifically addresses scripts? That’s actually wonderful, totally the opposite of what Gnome does (yes, I had to bring it up).

I stopped using Polonium, as it does not work perfectly fine for me. I’ll let them cook a bit more, its otherwise an excellent script/addon.

There is no single Bash standard to follow, only a few guidelines. One way you can check for some basic errors and formatting would be using an editor with support for Bash (in best case with a builtin LSP). At the end, you have to find your style and coding standards or adapt what others do if you want work with them or edit their files.

• Otherwise there is a well known tool for checking Bash files: https://www.shellcheck.net/ You can use it online and as a downloaded program on your local machine. After using shellcheck for a bit I got used to some of its conventions and recommendations, such as always wrapping variables like in ${variable} and some other things.
• Google has a coding style guide, but not everyone likes it: https://google.github.io/styleguide/shellguide.html
• Related is the Bash Reference Manual from GNU: https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/bash.html Off course this is not a guide on how to style or program, but it helps in understanding how GNU does things.

BTW the mk-blog link is 404 for me.

https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-6.html#h-103344

Assuming this is the correct source for Canada’s law about copyright. In the section about backup copies 29.24 (1):

( c ) the person, in order to make the reproduction, did not circumvent, as defined in section 41, a technological protection measure, as defined in that section, or cause one to be circumvented; and

( d ) the person does not give any of the reproductions away.

So (d) means it is not allowed to distribute the backup copy. As far as I understand. This is standard in most countries in the world. Also I cited ( c ), because this is usually also standard law. Normally, you are only allowed to make backups, if you do not circumvent any protection. Well its up to the interpretation if the Switch has such protection measure that falls into this category. But still, for our topic, (d) is relevant and seems to not allow for distribution of backup copies.

Mind you, I am also not a lawyer. And not everything needs to go to court in order to have an understanding of the law. Off course, unless it is a bit of grey area like in the case of ROMs. But I think this is addressed in the above quote. I hope this is the correct source! So for the time being, I have to assume law regarding this is just the same as in most other countries, because there is nothing else for me to evaluate here.

Downloading Roms from others is basically taking their copy. Its not a copy of your individual cart. And that’s the thing. You have the right to make a copy of your cart and use it. But you are not allowed to distribute the copy. One could probably get away by using Roms from others, but that is open to interpretation of law for individual countries. However the distribution itself is not allowed, in any (normal) country. And I also don’t believe (believe is not knowledge, I have no knowledge of Canadas laws) distributing personal backup copies is allowed in Canada as well.

Using copies from libraries is something different BTW, as these are not personal backups and are meant to be used by many other people. But that can be complicated too, in example in case of Archive.org. It’s a library in the US, but not other countries in the world.

There are Switch owners who buy Switch games, dump (in other words backup copy) that on their PC as a ROM and then play it on the Switch Deck. Even this best case scenario is a grey area in some countries. And that is something most people won’t do.

You can if you own the Mario game…

Owning alone is not enough. You need to dump it yourself. Downloading others Roms, even if you own the game, is illegal. Because you are only allowed to play what you dumped yourself, not the backup copy of a different individual cartridge.

How are the packages more tested than on Arch? Both systems have multiple testing stages in place, doesn’t it? In Archlinux there are 2 more stages before it lands on the actual end user. Sometimes one has to wait long time, in example for me RetroArch was updated after 6 weeks after official release. That’s not bleeding edge at all. Only the system core files get updated extremely quick. But that’s only about updating new packages.

The “leading edge” term of Fedora is about a total different aspect. It’s leading, because Fedora adopts certain technologies first, before even Archlinux adopts it. In example Pipewire. Archlinux waits a bit before the technology is adopted widespread, while Fedora is leading and adopting it early. And that has nothing to do about how often the packages itself get updated. People often mixup these two things (and so I did probably).

I wouldn’t be confident in recommending Fedora to noobs, because its a distribution that is on the bleeding edge side. But it depends on what type of noob we are talking about. There are noobs in Linux, who are technically well versed in Windows and have no problem in adapting to a new system. If someone wants to have the newest software, then Fedora might be it.

Also not many people have experience with Fedora, therefore less likely to be recommended. Most people use or used Ubuntu, maybe even started with Ubuntu. You or me may not like it, but its proven that Ubuntu is generally a good choice for newcomers to get into Linux. And that also plays into how many people know and are able to help. In contrast, Fedora is too much of a niche.

Always sad to see a game getting delisted. But props to the devs to notify us about half a year in advance. Usually these delistings are instant without notification and then its too late for people who want to buy it. Now the game is at a good discount, 80%. If I had interest into the game and there was no FH5 on Steam, then I’d buy it.

Licensing issues with music can easily be patched out and replaced by other music. But what can they do about the cars? I guess a lifetime license for the games is too expensive, so it will be a limited license and then the delisting is only matter of time. Man this sucks.

Nintendo should get sued for trolling. And if we are at it, sue Nintendo for using ideas and art styles from other games as well.

What’s been a bit disappointing is DEs getting on the wayland train so late. A lot of the kinks could have been worked out way earlier if they had given their 2ct of feedback right from the start, instead of waiting 10 years to even start thinking about migrating.

That’s the real issue. And its worse with Gnome, as Gnome doesn’t want support “all of” Wayland and its protocols. That means Wayland will be broken on Gnome, despite Gnome being the most used DE (at the moment). People complain about the problems in Wayland, but not all problems are caused by Wayland itself.

However there were or are two big reasons I can think of why Wayland wasn’t adopted early and for some may never: a) its much harder to be Wayland conform, because the window manager/DE has to do much more work, b) Wayland was just not ready before, as many important aspects were missing (in example some basic protocols, Nvidia) or broken. I don’t blame them. For the record, I am not a Wayland chill, just talking about this, because there are many misconceptions (me included, I’m not perfect) and switched to Wayland just end of last year. Before that Wayland did just not work for me. I even switched from Qtile to KDE, because KDE has probably the best Wayland support (I hate manual window management).

Edit: I just remembered another reason why Wayland wasn’t probably adopted early. Canonical/Ubuntu started a Wayland alternative called Mir (that was before Mir transformed into a Wayland compositor). And devs probably didn’t want set on Wayland or Mir before knowing what will be around in the future.

Wayland kinda is an x.org project in the first place.

Not really. Wayland is fundamentally different from Xorg. Otherwise we would not need Wayland and create X12. It’s like saying mechanical hard drives are kind of Solid State Drives, just because they allow to do something similar. Even if the developers are the same, does not mean the technology is.

AFAIK it’s officially organised under freedesktop but the core devs are x.org people.

I’m not sure if this is correct. But let’s assume this is correct. Why does it matter? If Wayland was developed by different people than those who maintain Xorg at the moment, would not change the fact that we need Wayland, because it is different and solves issues that cannot be solved with Xorg without rewriting it. And nobody wants to rewrite Xorg or understand the code (other than very basic security maintenance).

Not surprised.

If the alternative is a new system that literally does nothing? Sure!

You should read about Wayland. Doing nothing is absolutely wrong.

X11 may be old and whatever you want, but it works and it’s battle-tested.

It doesn’t work. There are parts of X11 which are broken. And you reply to a reply where I already listed 2 huge points, which are not even the only ones. And you ignore that X11/Xorg code is totally spaghetti, huge and has lot of old code that not everyone understands, because it has ton of workarounds to make it somehow half baked working on modern times. Nobody wants to work on the code, doing more than basic maintenance. And you should think about the future too, not just about yesterday and today on your personal computer. Think bigger. X11 is just not enough anymore going forward, for the next coming decades.

Wayland can’t even launch a full desktop session in my machine, which is even less than the failure Pulseaudio was back in its day and that’s saying something.

Are you on Gnome? Did you install Wayland on top of a running X11 system and did not configure it correctly? X11 doesn’t work on my machine too, because everything is Wayland configured. So whats your point? Off course one is not a 100% replacement. There will be changes, and both are incomplete and are not working 100% perfectly. The point of Wayland is not being 100% compatible with the setup you have for Xorg/X11. There are things like reading from keyboard on any application that is running is a security risk in X11. Wayland prevents that. Which in turn means that some programs (even important ones) won’t work. And they are working on a solution.

I switched to Wayland just end of last year and one of the reasons is that X11 does not handle multiple monitors well, if they have different sizes and refreshrates, especially if you add G-Sync and probably FreeSync on the other monitor. X11 is broken at that front.

I argue that X11 would have hyperactive development, if we did not have Wayland (or Mir, before it turned into a Wayland compositor). There are at least two major fields that do not work perfectly and cannot be changed by simple updates, it needs rewrite from ground up: a) advanced multi-monitor handling of different kind of monitors at the same time, b) security issues related to keyloggers, as apps are not isolated. Nobody want to touch the X11 code for more than simple maintenance, no one wants to rewrite major portions or add new features.

We just need Wayland, as you already noted there are very good arguments. A complete new base with modern code and people developing for modern times and hardware just makes sense. Think about it, do you really want to have X11 going forward the next decades? It’s like holding to hard drives and saying its okay, there are no problems, and writing off SSDs.

Yes, you are right. I always get tripped up with this one. Xorg is the implementation of the X11 protocol.

deleted by creator

We even disagree on what “dead development” means. :D ( Edit: To add a bit substance to my reply, minimal maintenance is not actively developed in my books. )

Dead in the sense of development. I thought this was obvious. But I explained it for you, here you go. (Edit: I forgot to be nice. )

Wayland is still incomplete, but that is besides the point I was making. X is still not dead, even living within XWayland, within Wayland. X11 is just one implementation of the X Protocol and XWayland is a new implementation.

Wayland itself is functional and working, just not 100% compatible to X11. The same could be said about X11, it would be nice if they could get some basic functionality working right; but they can’t, and that is why we need to replace it with something more modern and better. I think Wayland is working on a solution for restoring window position and size.

When X was created, there was no compatibility needed. Wayland on the other hand is in a different position, where it needs to innovate, make it more secure and keep as much as possible compatibility to X11, DEs and window managers. It’s just unfair to just say Wayland would not have basic functionality working. It also depends on the desktop environments and GNOME is often to blame for.