Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 59

Thread: Wayland's Weston Now Handles Full-Screen X Windows

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    I don't think they have a huge team in order to pull something like this fast. X i think has more people.
    Almost any project has more people. There is a huge shortage of developers in the Linux desktop space, despite hypothetical claims of FOSS allowing millions of eyeballs and hands. Microsoft has a test team for one small part of Windows that swamps the size of the developer pools for X/Wayland/GTK/GNOME combined. Turns out most people want to get paid for their hard work.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    Almost any project has more people. There is a huge shortage of developers in the Linux desktop space, despite hypothetical claims of FOSS allowing millions of eyeballs and hands. Microsoft has a test team for one small part of Windows that swamps the size of the developer pools for X/Wayland/GTK/GNOME combined. Turns out most people want to get paid for their hard work.
    Most wayland contributors are payed devs i think. Intel pays some, colabora some, the guy working on the input thing is payed and so on. Its just that there are few and no company as a whole is interested in desktop linux much. At least in advancing it.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    Wayland should never be adopted as it is broken by design. It will just slow down applications compared to X without compositing.
    Please explain. Broken by design is a much more serious accusation than merely a poor implementation.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackout23 View Post
    I won't be using it on my desktop pc untill nvidia driver supports KMS anyway. Which I'm afraid will be never.
    /fail

    The nvidia driver already supports kernel mode setting, they just have a proprietary implementation of it.

    NVidia just has to support the buffer sharing API that Wayland uses, which should be simple.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garegin View Post
    dont make me laugh. pulseaudio has latency issues so that you have to use a different mixer if you want low latency. i hope this is not an inherent flaw, cause if it is lennard should be hung from a lamppost.
    Halfway: with pulseaudio, latency is tied directly to cpu usage, but there's an old and complicated api to ask for better latency. No guarantees that you'll get it, though.
    Source: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft...actencyControl
    Of course, the OSS4 documentation points out that at least for video you only need ~30-40 millisecond latencies; the OSS4 developers state that they consider these normal latencies and claim that for single-digit latencies you need special hardware...Source:http://manuals.opensound.com/develop...io_timing.html

    @JS987: I prefer X to wayland, but if you're bashing wayland, present some evidence.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    Most wayland contributors are payed devs i think. Intel pays some, colabora some, the guy working on the input thing is payed and so on. Its just that there are few and no company as a whole is interested in desktop linux much. At least in advancing it.
    Yeah, there are a few paid developers, who get paid to do whatever makes the companies and their clients happy. Unfortunately, the work is usually towards some embedded thing, which does not care too much about desktop user features. At other times, the work is for such low-level features, like the sub-surfaces that I am working on, that it does not directly benefit users. "Hey, I can make videos play with a lot less CPU usage! Uhh, sorry, it doesn't really improve desktop user interfaces, but it can make toolkit developers a little happier. Isn't that cool?! No? eheh..."

    Thankfully there are some contributors who work on the desktop user features, so we're not completely stalled there.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    I prefer X to wayland, but if you're bashing wayland, present some evidence.
    Wayland doesn't support server side rendering, which means 2D acceleration using graphics driver isn't possible.
    Applications will have to use OpenGL for 2D acceleration.
    OpenGL (snb/gl) is (very) slow for 2D graphics compared to Intel SNA (snb/sna).
    http://people.freedesktop.org/~ickle...r-20120712.png
    OpenGL causes higher memory usage which means less memory can be used for disk caching
    which means applications run slower.
    qtperf4 uses 3 MB of private memory with X11 backend (-graphicssystem native), but 25 MB with OpenGL backend (-graphicssystem opengl).
    Last edited by JS987; 02-14-2013 at 06:27 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pq__ View Post
    Yeah, there are a few paid developers, who get paid to do whatever makes the companies and their clients happy. Unfortunately, the work is usually towards some embedded thing, which does not care too much about desktop user features. At other times, the work is for such low-level features, like the sub-surfaces that I am working on, that it does not directly benefit users. "Hey, I can make videos play with a lot less CPU usage! Uhh, sorry, it doesn't really improve desktop user interfaces, but it can make toolkit developers a little happier. Isn't that cool?! No? eheh..."

    Thankfully there are some contributors who work on the desktop user features, so we're not completely stalled there.
    pq__ is there a timeframe for the desktop stuff??


    Maybe a specific todo (and the subsequent phoronix article ) can help things a bit.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    Wayland doesn't support server side rendering, which means 2D acceleration using graphics driver isn't possible.
    Applications will have to use OpenGL for 2D acceleration.
    OpenGL (snb/gl) is (very) slow for 2D graphics compared to Intel SNA (snb/sna).
    http://people.freedesktop.org/~ickle...r-20120712.png
    Radeon is already doing 2D-over-OpenGL for all GCN hardware so thats a non-issue for the simple fact we are already doing it. Does glamor suck right now? Yes. Can it get better? Yes. Will it get better? Yes.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Radeon is already doing 2D-over-OpenGL for all GCN hardware so thats a non-issue for the simple fact we are already doing it. Does glamor suck right now? Yes. Can it get better? Yes. Will it get better? Yes.
    I don't use Radeon hardware. Glamor will maybe become as fast as Intel SNA, but it can take years. Glamor will have to be supported by GTK/Cairo/Qt as Wayland does no rendering.
    Memory usage won't be probably solved as it is likely limitation of OpenGL.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •