Package Details: mutter-performance 48.2-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/mutter-performance.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: mutter-performance
Description: Window manager and compositor for GNOME
Upstream URL: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter
Licenses: GPL-2.0-or-later
Groups: gnome
Conflicts: mutter
Provides: libmutter-16.so, mutter
Submitter: Terence
Maintainer: glorious-yellow
Last Packager: glorious-yellow
Votes: 76
Popularity: 0.013505
First Submitted: 2019-07-09 09:35 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-04-14 05:13 (UTC)

Dependencies (68)

Required by (16)

Sources (3)

Pinned Comments

<deleted-account> commented on 2023-05-02 11:11 (UTC)

gnome-44 diffs: https://gist.github.com/FiestaLake/aaf26db49292840aef43210001b4e080

For people using [staging] & [gnome-unstable] branch (or [testing] branch in the near future).

Apply the patch with git am {patchname}.patch

<deleted-account> commented on 2023-02-13 04:41 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the co-maintainer of the package.

Unfortunately, my laptop's gpu died a few days ago. So I cannot bring lots of changes to the package. The only thing I can do right now is upgrading the package along with mr1441 only.

Sorry for the situation and I hope you understand it. If you want to be a co-maintainer of this package, please contact fiestalake@disroot.org and/or the other maintainers. Thanks.

<deleted-account> commented on 2022-10-27 15:54 (UTC)

gnome-43 diffs: https://gist.github.com/FiestaLake/d6d9e597fe693b3f55d92890880e463c

For people using [testing] branch.

Apply the patch with git am {patchname}.patch

Saren commented on 2018-08-30 14:52 (UTC) (edited on 2020-10-06 05:50 (UTC) by Saren)

If you are getting errors like fatal: bad revision '73e8cf32' while building this package, refer to PKGBUILD and see which patches caused this. Then, go to the related URLs, replace the commit hashes. If there are conflicts, comment out the patches.

Please notify me in comment section if this happens.

The optional performance patches are by default enabled.

A package for gnome-shell performance patches: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gnome-shell-performance/

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 .. 65 Next › Last »

Terence commented on 2019-01-31 10:35 (UTC)

@deezid ok it seems windows dragging is somehow back to smoothness for me too (maybe because of 117?). Sure please do, thanks.

deezid commented on 2019-01-31 10:31 (UTC)

@Terence, dragging windows is fine with the patch (and all the others - skipping 168), even while playing 8K60p H265 or VP9 footage in mpv or vlc, or 8K30p in Chrome (no real hardware acceleration). I contacted him via mail, maybe I can put you in via CC?

Terence commented on 2019-01-31 10:24 (UTC)

@deezid this revert is actually not from me, I just try to gather up all those performance goodies ;) Is vanvugt on IRC/Matrix ? Have you tried dragging windows with video playing?

deezid commented on 2019-01-31 10:18 (UTC) (edited on 2019-01-31 10:21 (UTC) by deezid)

@Terence, we have to reach out to Daniel van Vugt I guess since your revert.patch actually helps a lot keeping framerates and lag adequate while there's high CPU load.

deezid commented on 2019-01-31 10:16 (UTC)

@Calindan2013, these work smoothly here (meta left, right, up) strange. But then I only have a 60Hz screen. Only frame drops I notice are zooming in by clicking on the workspace switcher on the right, but according to van Vugt, this still has to be fixed and isn't necessary a Mutter but JS and Shell problem.

deezid commented on 2019-01-31 10:11 (UTC)

@Terence, without the revert.patch everything slows down when playing 4K videos in YouTube. It's not as bad as without 117 applied though. The version you have right now seems to everything right (for me at least lol)

calindan2013 commented on 2019-01-31 10:10 (UTC)

deezid: working in overview has random frame drops and slow downs, minimize/maximize/restore to screen etc.

deezid commented on 2019-01-31 10:07 (UTC)

@Terence, thanks for the explanation, compiling without the patch atm.

Terence commented on 2019-01-31 10:04 (UTC)

@deezid no problem and yes it is enabled by default. If you inspect the PKGBUILD at line 12 you can see there is a variable you can either enable or disable which controls if the patch is applied or not.

Terence commented on 2019-01-31 10:01 (UTC)

@calindan2013 Thanks for your insightful comment. I suggest you to simply stop trying it as you stated before 'the packages is useless.'

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 .. 65 Next › Last »