Category Archives: GNOME

GStreamer Conference 2015

Wanted to let everyone know that the GStreamer Conference 2015 is happening for the 6th time this year. So if you want to attend the premier open source multimedia conference you can do so in Dublin, Ireland between the 8th and 9th of October. If you want to attend I suggest registering as early as possible using the GStreamer Conference registration webpage. Like earlier years the GStreamer Conference is co-located with other great conferences like the Embedded Linux Conference Europe so you have the chance to combine the attendance into one trip.

The GStreamer Conference has always been a great opportunity to not only learn about the latest developments in GStreamer, but about whats happeing in the general Linux multimedia stack, latest news from the world of codec development and other related topics. I strongly recommend setting aside the 8th and the 9th of October for a trip to Dublin and the GStreamer Conference.

Also a heads up for those interested in doing a talk. The formal deadline for submitting a proposal is this Sunday the 9th of August, so you need to hurry to send in a proposal. You find the details for how to submit a talk on the GStreamer Conference 2015 website. While talks submitted before the 9th will be prioritized I do recommend anyone seeing this after the deadline to still send in a proposal as there might be a chance to get on the program anyway if you get your proposal in during next week.

Fedora Workstation next steps : Introducing Pinos

So this will be the first in a series of blogs talking about some major initiatives we are doing for Fedora Workstation. Today I want to present and talk about a thing we call Pinos.

So what is Pinos? One of the original goals of Pinos was to provide the same level of advanced hardware handling for Video that PulseAudio provides for Audio. For those of you who has been around for a while you might remember how you once upon a time could only have one application using the sound card at the same time until PulseAudio properly fixed that. Well Pinos will allow you to share your video camera between multiple applications and also provide an easy to use API to do so.

Video providers and consumers are implemented as separate processes communicating with DBUS and exchanging video frames using fd passing.

Some features of Pinos

  • Easier switching of cameras in your applications
  • It will also allow you to more easily allow applications to switch between multiple cameras or mix the content from multiple sources.

  • Multiple types of video inputs
  • Supports more than cameras. Pinos also supports other type of video sources, for instance it can support your desktop as a video source.

  • GStreamer integration
  • Pinos is built using GStreamer and also have GStreamer elements supporting it to make integrating it into GStreamer applications simple and straightforward.

  • Pinos got some audio support
  • Well it tries to solve some of the same issues for video that PulseAudio solves for audio. Namely letting you have multiple applications sharing the same camera hardware. Pinos does also include audio support in order to let you handle both.

What do we want to do with this in Fedora Workstation?

  • One thing we know is of great use and importance for many of our users, including many developers who wants to make videos demonstrating their software, is to have better screen capture support. One of the test cases we are using for Pinos is to improve the built in screen casting capabilities of GNOME 3, the goal being to reducing overhead and to allow for easy setup of picture in picture capturing. So you can easily set it up so there will be a camera capturing your face and voice and mixing that into your screen recording.
  • Video support for Desktop Sandboxes. We have been working for a while on providing technology for sandboxing your desktop applications and while we with a little work can use PulseAudio for giving the sandboxed applications audio access we needed something similar for video. Pinos provides us with such a solution.

Who is working on this?
Pinos is being designed and written by Wim Taymans who is the co-creator of the GStreamer multimedia framework and also a regular contributor to the PulseAudio project. Wim is also the working for Red Hat as a Principal Engineer, being in charge of a lot of our multimedia support in both Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Fedora. It is also worth nothing that it draws many of its ideas from an early prototype by William Manley called PulseVideo and builds upon some of the code that was merged into GStreamer due to that effort.

Where can I get the code?
The code is currently hosteed in Wim’s private repository on freedesktop. You can get it at cgit.freedesktop.org/~wtay/pinos.

How can I get involved or talk to the author
You can find Wim on Freenode IRC, he uses the name wtay and hangs out in both the #gstreamer and #pulseaudio IRC channels.
Once the project is a bit further along we will get some basic web presence set up and a mailing list created.

FAQ

If Pinos contains Audio support will it eventually replace PulseAudio too?
Probably not, the usecases and goals for the two systems are somewhat different and it is not clear that trying to make Pinos accommodate all the PulseAudio usescases would be worth the effort or possible withour feature loss. So while there is always a temptation to think ‘hey, wouldn’t it be nice to have one system that can handle everything’ we are at this point unconvinced that the gain outweighs the pain.

Will Pinos offer re-directing kernel APIs for video devices like PulseAudio does for Audio? In order to handle legacy applications?
No, that was possible due to the way ALSA worked, but V4L2 doesn’t have such capabilities and thus we can not take advantage of them.

Why the name Pinos?
The code name for the project was PulseVideo, but to avoid confusion with the PulseAudio project and avoid people making to many assumptions based on the name we decided to follow in the tradition of Wayland and Weston and take inspiration from local place names related to the creator. So since Wim lives in Pinos de Alhaurin close to Malaga in Spain we decided to call the project Pinos. Pinos is the word for pines in Spanish :)

Summary of Fedora Workstation feedback

So I composed an email today to the Fedora-desktop mailing list to summarize the feedback we got here on the blog post on
my request for reasons people where not switching to Fedora. Thought I should share it here too for easier access for the
wider community and for the commentators to see that I did take the time to go through and try to summarize the posts.
Of course feel free to comment on this blog if you think I missed something important or if there are other major items we
should be thinking about. We will be discussing this both on the mailing list, in our Workstation working group meetings and at Flock in August. Anyway, I will let you go on to read the email (you can find the thread here if interested.

************************
A couple of weeks ago I blogged about who Fedora Workstation is an integrated system, but also asking for
feedback for why people are not migrating to Fedora Workstation, especially asking about why people would be using
GNOME 3 on another distro. So I got about 140 comments on that post so I thought I should write up a summary and
post here. There was of course a lot of things mentioned, but I will try to keep this summary to what I picked up
as the recurring topics.

So while this of course is a poll consisting of self selected commentators I still think the sample is big enough that we
should take the feedback into serious consideration for our plans going forward. Some of them I even think are already
handled by underway efforts.

Release cadence
Quite a few people mentioned this, ranging from those who wanted to switch us to a rolling release, a tick/tock
release style, to just long release cycles. Probably more people saying they thought the current 6 Month cycle
was just to harrowing than people who wanted rolling releases or tick/tock releases.

3rd Party Software
This was the single most brought up item. With people saying that they stayed on other distros due to the pain of
getting 3rd party software on Fedora. This ranged from drivers (NVidia, Wi-Fi), to media codecs to end user
applications. Width of software available in general was also brought up quite a few times. If anyone is in any doubt
that our current policy here is costing us users I think these comments clearly demonstrates otherwise.

Optimus support
Quite a few people did bring up that our Optimus support wasn’t great. Luckily I know Bastien Nocera is working on
something there based on work by Dave Arlie, so hopefully this is one we can check off soon.

Upgrades
Many people also pointed out that we had no UI for upgrading Fedora.

HiDPI issues
A few comments on various challenges people have with HiDPI screens, especially when dealing with non-GTK3 apps-

Multimonitor support
A few comments that our multimonitor support could be better

SELinux is a pain
A few comments about SELinux still getting in the way at times

Better Android integration
A few people asked for more/better Android device integration features

Built in backup solution
A few people requested we create some kind of integrated backup solution

Also a few concrete requests in terms of applications for Fedora:
http://www.mixxx.org
http://www.vocalproject.net
https://gnumdk.github.io/lollypop/
http://peterlevi.com/variety/
http://foldercolor.tuxfamily.org
choqok for GNOME (microblogging client)

Fedora Workstation: More than the sum of its parts

So I came across this very positive review of Fedora Workstation on linux.com, although it was billed as a review of GNOME 3.16. Which is of course correct, in the sense that the desktop we are going to ship on Fedora Workstation 22 is GNOME 3.16. But I wanted to take the opportunity to highlight that when you look at Fedora Workstation it is a complete and integrated operating system. As I mentioned in a blog post about Fedora Workstation last April the core idea for Fedora Workstation is to stop treating the operating system as a bag of parts and instead look at it as a whole, because if we are to drain the swamp here we need to solve the major issues that people face with their desktop regardless of if that issue is in the kernel, the graphics drivers, glibc or elsewhere in your system. We can not just look at the small subset of packages that provides the chrome for your user interface in isolation.

This is why we are working on reliable firmware upgrades for your UEFI motherboard by participating in the UEFI working group and adding functionality in GNOME Software to handle doing firmware updates.

This is why we recently joined Khronos to make sure the standards for doing 3D on Linux are good and open source friendly.

This is why we been working so hard on improving coverage of Appdata metadata coverage, well beyond the confines of ‘GNOME’ software.

This is why we have Richard Hughes and Owen Taylor working on how we can improve battery life when running
Fedora or RHEL on laptops.

This is why we created dnf to replace yum, to get a fast and efficient package update system.

This is why we are working on an Adwaita theme for Qt

And this is why we are pushing hard forward with a lot of other efforts like Wayland, libinput, Fleet Commander, Boxes and more.

So when you look at the user experience you get on Fedora Workstation, remember that it is not just a question of which version of GNOME we are shipping, but it is the fact that we are working hard on putting together a tightly vertically integrated and tested system from the kernel up to core desktop applications.

Anyone who has been using Fedora for a long while knows that this change was a major change in philosophy and approach for the project, as Fedora up to the 21 release of the 3 new products was very much defined by the opposite, being all about the lego blocks, which contributed to the image of Fedora being a bleeding edge system where you should be prepared to do a lot of bleeding and where you probably wanted to keep your toolbox with you at all times in case something broke. So I have to say that I am mightily impressed by how the Fedora community has taken to this major change where we now are instead focusing our efforts on our 3 core products and are putting a lot of effort into creating stuff that is polished and reliable, and which aims to be leading edge instead of bleeding edge.

So with all this in mind I was a little disappointed when the reviewer writing the article in question ended his review by saying he was now waiting for GNOME 3.16 to appear in Ubuntu GNOME, because there is no guarantees that he would get the same overall user experience in Ubuntu GNOME that we have developed for Fedora Workstation, which is the user experience his review reflects.

Anyway, I thought this could be a good opportunity to actually ask the wider community a question, especially if you are using GNOME on another distribution than Fedora, what are we still missing at this point for you to consider making a switch to Fedora Workstation? I know that for some of you the answer might be as simple as ‘worn in shoes fits the best’, but anything you might have beyond that would be great to hear.
I can’t promise that we will be able to implement every suggestion you add to this blog post, but I do promise that we will review and consider every suggestion you provide and try to see how it can fit into development plans going forward.

Congratulations to Endless Computer

So the Endless Computer kickstarter just succeeded in their funding goal of 100K USD. A big heartfelt congratulations to the whole team and I am looking forward to receiving my system. For everyone else out there I strongly recommend getting in on their kickstarter, not only do you get a cool looking computer with a really nice Linux desktop, you are helping a company forward that has the potential to take the linux dektop to the next level. And the be aware that the computer is a standard computer (yet very cool looking) at the end of the day, so if you want to install Fedora Workstation on it you can :)

kdbus discussion

I am following the discussion caused by Greg Kroah-Hartman requesting that kdbus be pulled into the next kernel release. First of all my hat of to Greg for his persistence and staying civil. There has already been quite a few posts to the thread at coming close to attempts at character assassination and a lot of emails just adding more noise, but no signal.

One point I feel is missing from the discussion here though is the question of not making the perfect the enemy of the good. A lot of the posters are saying that ‘hey, you should write something perfect here instead of what you have currently’. Which sounds reasonable on some level, but when you think of it is more a deflection strategy than a real suggestion. First of all the is no such thing as perfect. And secondly if there was how long would it take to provide the theoretical perfect thing? 2 more years, 4 years, 10 years?

Speaking as someone involved in making an operating system I can say that we would have liked to have kdbus 5 years ago and would much prefer to get kdbus in the next few Months, than getting something ‘perfect’ in 5 years from now.

So you can say ‘hey, you are creating a strawman here, nobody used the word ‘perfect” in the discussion. Sure, nobody used that word, but a lot of messages was written about how ‘something better’ should be created here instead. Yet, based on from where these people seemed to be coming the question I ask then is: Better for who? Better for the developers who are already using dbus in the applications or desktops? Better for a kernel developer who is never going to use it? Better for someone doing code review? Better for someone who doesn’t need the features of dbus, but who would want something else?

And what is ‘better’ anyway? Greg keeps calling for concrete technical feedback, but at the end of the day there is a lot of cases where the ‘best’ technical solution, to the degree you can measure that objectively, isn’t actually ‘the best’. I mean if I came up with a new format for storing multimedia on an optical disk, one which from a technical perspective is ‘better’ than the current Blu-Ray spec, that doesn’t mean it is actually better for the general public. Getting a non-standard optical disc that will not play in your home Blu-Ray player isn’t better for 99.999% of people, regardless of the technical merit of the on-disc data format.

Something can actually be ‘better’ just because it is based on something that already exists, something which have a lot of people already using it, lets people quickly extend what they already are doing with the new functionality without needing a re-write and something which is available ‘now’ as opposed to some undefined time in the future. And that is where I feel a lot of the debaters on the lkml are dropping the ball in this discussion; they just keeping asking for a ‘better solution’ to the challenges of a space they often don’t have any personal experience with developing in, because kdbus doesn’t conform to how they would implement a kernel IPC mechanism for the kind of problems they are used to trying to solve.

Also there has been a lot of arguments about the ‘design’ of kdbus and dbus. A lot of lacking concreteness to it and mostly coming from people very far removed from working on the desktop and other relevant parts of userspace. Which at the end of the day boils down to trying to make the lithmus test ‘you have to prove to me that making a better design is impossible’, and I think that anyone should be able to agree that if that was the test for adding anything to the Linux kernel or elsewhere then very little software would ever get added anywhere. In fact if we where to hold to that kind of argumentation we might as well leave software development behind and move to an online religion discussion forum tossing the good ol’ “prove to me that God doesn’t exist’ into the ring.

So in the end I hope Linus, who is the final arbiter here, doesn’t end up making the ‘perfect’ the enemy of the good.

Reliable BIOS updates in Fedora

Some years ago I bought myself a new laptop, deleted the windows partition and installed Fedora on the system. Only to later realize that the system had a bug that required a BIOS update to fix and that the only tool for doing such updates was available for Windows only. And while some tools and methods have been available from a subset of vendors, BIOS updates on Linux has always been somewhat of hit and miss situation. Well luckily it seems that we will finally get a proper solution to this problem.
Peter Jones, who is Red Hat’s representative to the UEFI working group and who is working on making sure we got everything needed to support this on Linux, approached me some time ago to let me know of the latest incoming update to the UEFI standard which provides a mechanism for doing BIOS updates. Which means that any system that supports UEFI 2.5 will in theory be one where we can initiate the BIOS update from Linux. So systems supporting this version of the UEFI specs is expected to become available through the course of this year and if you are lucky your hardware vendor might even provide a BIOS update bringing UEFI 2.5 support to your existing hardware, although you would of course need to do that one BIOS update in the old way.

So with Peter’s help we got hold of some prototype hardware from our friends at Intel which already got UEFI 2.5 support. This hardware is currently in the hands of Richard Hughes. Richard will be working on incorporating the use of this functionality into GNOME Software, so that you can do any needed BIOS updates through GNOME Software along with all your other software update needs.

Peter and Richard will as part of this be working to define a specification/guideline for hardware vendors for how they can make their BIOS updates available in a manner we can consume and automatically check for updates. We will try to align ourselves with the requirements from Microsoft in this area to allow the vendors to either use the exact same package for both Windows and Linux or at least only need small changes to them. We can hopefully get this specification up on freedesktop.org for wider consumption once its done.

I am also already speaking with a couple of hardware vendors to see if we can pilot this functionality with them, to both encourage them to support UEFI 2.5 as quickly as possible and also work with them to figure out the finer details of how to make the updates available in a easily consumable fashion.

Our hope here is that you eventually can get almost any hardware and know that if you ever need a BIOS update you can just fire up Software and it will tell you what if any BIOS updates are available for your hardware, and then let you download and install them. For people running Fedora servers we have had some initial discussions about doing BIOS updates through Cockpit, in addition of course to the command line tools that Peter is writing for this.

I mentioned in an earlier blog post that one of our goals with the Fedora Workstation is to drain the swamp in terms of fixing the real issues making using a Linux desktop challenging, well this is another piece of that puzzle and I am really glad we had Peter working with the UEFI standards group to ensure the final specification was useful also for Linux users.

Anyway as soon as I got some data on concrete hardware that will support this I will make sure to let you know.

Thanks for all the applications

Jobs at Red Hat
So I got a LOT of responses to my blog post about the open positions we have here at Red Hat working on Fedora and the Desktop. In fact I got so many it will probably take a bit of time before we can work through them all. So you might have to wait a little bit before getting a response from us. Anyway, thanks you to everyone who sent me their CV, much appreciated and looking forward to working with those of you we end up hiring!

Builder campaign closes in 13 hours
I want to make one last pitch for everyone to contribute to the Builder crowdfunding campaign. It has just passed 47 000 USD as I write this, which means we just need another 3000 USD to reach
the graphical debugger stretch goal. Don’t miss out on this opportunity to help this exciting open source project!

Want to join our innovative development team doing cool open source software?

So Red Hat are currently looking to hire into the various teams building and supporting efforts such as the Fedora Workstation, the Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation and of course Fedora and RHEL in generaL. We are looking at hiring around 6-7 people to help move these and other Red Hat efforts forward. We are open to candidates from any country where Red Hat has a presence, but for a subset of the positions candidates relocating to our main engineering offices in Brno, Czech Republic or Westford, Massachussets, USA, will be a requirement or candidates interested in that will be given preference. We are looking for a mix of experienced and junior candidates, so regardless of it you are fresh out of school or haven been around for a while this might be for you.

So instead of providing a list of job descriptions what I want to do here is list of various skills and backgrounds we want and then we will adjust the exact role of the candidates we end up hiring depending on the mix of skills we find. So this might be for you if you are a software developer and have one or more of these skills or backgrounds:

* Able to program in C
* Able to program in Ruby
* Able to program in Javascript
* Able to program in Assembly
* Able to program in Python
* Experience with Linux Kernel development
* Experience with GTK+
* Experience with Wayland
* Experience with x.org
* Experience with developing for PPC architecture
* Experience with compiler optimisations
* Experience with llvm-pipe
* Experience with SPICE
* Experience with developing software like Virtualbox, VNC, RDP or similar
* Experience with building web services
* Experience with OpenGL development
* Experience with release engineering
* Experience with Project Atomic
* Experience with graphics driver enablement
* Experience with other PC hardware enablement
* Experience with enterprise software management tools like Satellite or ManageIQ
* Experience with accessibility software
* Experience with RPM packaging
* Experience with Fedora
* Experience with Red Hat Enterprise Linux
* Experience with GNOME

It should be clear from the list above that we are not just looking for people with a background in desktop development this time around, two of the positions for instance will mostly be dealing with Linux kernel development. We are looking for people here who can help us make sure the latest and greatest laptops on the market works great with Fedora and RHEL, be that on the graphics side or in terms of general hardware enablement. These jobs will put you right in the middle of the action in terms of defining the future of the 3 Fedora variants, especially the Workstation; defining the future of Red Hats Enterprise Linux Workstation products and pushing the Linux platform in general forward.

If you are interested in talking with us about if we can find a place for you in Red Hat as part of this hiring round please send me your CV and some words about yourself and I will make sure to put you in contact with our recruiters. And if you are unsure about what kind of things we work on here I suggest taking a look at my latest blog about our Fedora Workstation 22 efforts to see a small sample of some of the things we are currently working on.

You can reach me at cschalle(at)redhat(dot)com.