KDE Plasma Login Manager Won’t Support Systemd-Free Linux or BSD Systems

Zare said:
Well some of you completely ignore the aspect of graphical Unix workstation. You can run slim X11 environments booted with startx.
I right now do the startx too because I haven't gotten around taking care of sddm yet.



Sudo is useless?
If you follow official procedure of Steam under FreeBSD it is going to live under another account.
If you want to run Steam using a single command from your main acc, you need sudo/doas.
Click to expand...
You can also edit the install script, that's what I do. I just install it under my user account. :/
 
jcrowell said:
I just did this: https://github.com/Sonic-DE/sonic-login-manager

Still need to figure out why the restart, shutdown, etc buttons don't work but Wayland and systemd are no longer hard dependencies on this fork.

There's a video showing it working in the zip.
Click to expand...
video shows Xorg session working in VirtualBox... using the Sonic Login Manager.

My own latest update is that the official SDDM works fine with both Xorg and Wayland, even the restart/shutdown/etc, but amdgpu graphics stack is crashing.
 
Plasma-session will stop supporting X11 altogether next year, per roadmap if I saw correctly.
Some Linux distributions are slated to support X11 to 2030 so I guess the last X11-Plasma will be sort of LTS edition.

I would not mind if KDE stays on FreeBSD in its current shape.
 
Wayland SHALL resolve at least below before becoming default:
  • Sane IM Engines support at worst as the level of X11, INDEPENDENT WITH COMPOSITOR. Compositor-specific configs are NOT acceptable. The worst level should be per-toolkits (i.e., Gtk, SDL, Qt, ...).
  • Add forcible backward compatibility feature for v1 protocol into v3 protocol of text inputs. The framework for v3 should auto-detect apps that supports v1 only and sanely fallback to v1 by itself (no changes should be forced to apps!). Keep backward compatibilities at worst within Wayland!
  • Everything KiCAD team pointed out here. I'm not a user of KiCAD, but feel these requirements reasonable and think Wayland protocol level supports are needed at least some of them. Note that some of the requirements like positioning of "docks" may not work (well) with tiling WMs/compositors even on X11.
For the first item, make compositor (at the level of spec to implement!) be the only client that IM engines can see, mimic XIM for both IM engines and clients and securely delegate the requests and responses may be the "not so bad" way.
In this case, if properly implemented, environment variables used for IM engines on X11 shouldn't harm. What's needed would be pass them to XWayland sessions and let XWayland to handle properly, while shut off (unset from env vars to be passed) to native Wayland apps using native v1 or v3 protocol.
 
I seem to have only 4 top-level kde ports installed. Will these continue working if KDE no longer supports Xorg, I wonder ?? [ Just saw a thread on news.ycombinator.com about the looming Xorg>Wayland KDE switch which echoed some of the concerns so far in this thread AFAIK ]
 
mer said:
So maybe don't use KDE?
Honest question, what does it really bring to the table that ctwm, jwm, twm, etc don't?
Click to expand...
usable screenshot utilities, native file managers, usable window decorations, and a ton of utilities (like Okular). If I'm forced to use TWM/ctwm, it's not that different from dropping into command-line. Ricing a basic X window manager like TWM so that it does something useful is just too much work, KDE brings the usability for me, while still preserving excellent access to command-line via
x11/konsole... :P

And KDE brings the unified experience instead of independent (but disjointed and clunky) utilities. I don't want to have to remember a sequence of a dozen steps just to take a freaking screenshot. Or realizing that copy-paste doesn't work properly because the window manager was just too basic to implement that - am I supposed to do the research it takes just to get copy-paste working correctly every single time without hours of programming? Sorry, I got better things to do with my time. And this is why I'm grateful that KDE is available and usable on FreeBSD.
 
astyle said:
And KDE brings the unified experience instead of independent (but disjointed and clunky) utilities. I don't want to have to remember a sequence of a dozen steps just to take a freaking screenshot.
Click to expand...
xfce4-screenshooter-plugin works no config out-the-box with Print Screen key with basic Xfce :D
astyle said:
Or realizing that copy-paste doesn't work properly because the window manager was just too basic to implement that - am I supposed to do the research it takes just to get copy-paste working correctly every single time without hours of programming?
Click to expand...
I'm thinking that's a Wayland invention (reports about inconsistent copy/paste on Plasma 6, and I've seen it GNOME; apparently I copy/paste faster than whatever abstraction can handle :cool: while Windows and X11 keep up fine)
 
MrBSD said:
Its friendly to newcomers. It will attract new users.
Click to expand...
I personally disagree that it's friendly, but lets put that aside for now.

The issue is explicitly tying to systemd.

Systemd does not run on FreeBSD (and hopefully never will)
That means porting versions that require systemd need to patch around the need (maybe impossible) or the port stops (forks) at pre-systemd and stagnates or selectively imports upstream.
As upstream move forward and requires/depends/tightly integrates to systemd, selective imports become more and more work.
So practically, KDE on FreeBSD will stop at some pre systemd version maybe with security updates manually applied.
 
wolffnx said:
Can I use FreeBSD?
Click to expand...
No.
mer said:
I personally disagree that it's friendly, but lets put that aside for now.
Click to expand...
You can disagree, but you cant deny the fact that, out of the box, its familiar to 99% of users coming from windows. It has a taskbar at the bottom and "start menu" on the left. It has desktop icons and its own suite of applications. That initial impression to someone coming from windows is very important. It needs to be somewhat familiar environment that is easy to understand and grasp by non technical person.

To me personally, KDE is the worst desktop environment ever created and i would never use it. But im more than capable of understanding why it was chosen as default. Its a strategic decission. Not technical.
mer said:
The issue is explicitly tying to systemd.
Click to expand...
If you dont use KDE, why worry ? There are non systemd linux distros out there that use elogind to run desktop environments that require systemd. I see no issue of doing the same on FreeBSD.
mer said:
Systemd does not run on FreeBSD (and hopefully never will)
That means porting versions that require systemd need to patch around the need (maybe impossible) or the port stops (forks) at pre-systemd and stagnates or selectively imports upstream.
As upstream move forward and requires/depends/tightly integrates to systemd, selective imports become more and more work.
So practically, KDE on FreeBSD will stop at some pre systemd version maybe with security updates manually applied.
Click to expand...
If it ever comes to that, they can always switch to Cinnamon or XFCE. I really dont understand the fuss about all this. People are behaving like KDE is forced down our throats with no option to use anything else. As long as you have the option to install minimal version of FreeBSD, i absolutely see no problem.
 
MrBSD said:
No.

You can disagree, but you cant deny the fact that, out of the box, its familiar to 99% of users coming from windows. It has a taskbar at the bottom and "start menu" on the left. It has desktop icons and its own suite of applications. That initial impression to someone coming from windows is very important. It needs to be somewhat familiar environment that is easy to understand and grasp by non technical person.

To me personally, KDE is the worst desktop environment ever created and i would never use it. But im more than capable of understanding why it was chosen as default. Its a strategic decission. Not technical.

If you dont use KDE, why worry ? There are non systemd linux distros out there that use elogind to run desktop environments that require systemd. I see no issue of doing the same on FreeBSD.

If it ever comes to that, they can always switch to Cinnamon or XFCE. I really dont understand the fuss about all this. People are behaving like KDE is forced down our throats with no option to use anything else. As long as you have the option to install minimal version of FreeBSD, i absolutely see no problem.
Click to expand...
But I want to use FreeBSD :(
Btw I dont give a .. About kde , fvwm all the way
 
I don't understand all the KDE hate outside of this X11 support dropping thing.

KDE is directly influenced by CDE. When CDE was prescribed for UNIX 98 standard, it was by no means lightweight, efficient or optimal. The UI shell of Mac OS or Windows 95/98 was far lighter.

Today your CDE and Motif might come up as lightweight but it was not so in 1998. KDE just moves on with the same narrative.

People who want xywm as default are downright stubborn for not seeing the fact that it is just a twm with extra stuff. We have had this default tiny WM thing for decades.

People who are expected to hit "yes install default desktop" are not expected to edit the config files afterwards.
 
Zare said:
I don't understand all the KDE hate outside of this X11 support dropping thing.

KDE is directly influenced by CDE. When CDE was prescribed for UNIX 98 standard, it was by no means lightweight, efficient or optimal. The UI shell of Mac OS or Windows 95/98 was far lighter.

Today your CDE and Motif might come up as lightweight but it was not so in 1998. KDE just moves on with the same narrative.

People who want xywm as default are downright stubborn for not seeing the fact that it is just a twm with extra stuff. We have had this default tiny WM thing for decades.

People who are expected to hit "yes install default desktop" are not expected to edit the config files afterwards.
Click to expand...
That's a good point you make on the config files. I've heard lots of internet users talking about their config files being portable using certain window managers. But it's important to note that plasma and other desktop environments have portable and editable config files as well. Just something to consider when working on a backup solution, don't forget the config files. 😁 Nothing to do with your point on editing really, although you certainly can if you choose to do so. But modern stuff is great for the GUI options, it's much faster to edit using the GUI when it comes to config files. In fact i still would like to see a very good fstab GUI in ports. I know there are options but a port of gnome or kde disk utility would be handy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top