Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mir 1.0 Released For "Next-Generation of Graphical Solutions"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Royi
    Senior Member

  • Royi
    replied
    TheBlackCat
    Senior Member
    TheBlackCat , So, in light of waht you write we should see 2 things in systems which utilize Wayland:
    1. Better performance.
    2. Less resources used.

    Looking on some tests done on Phoronix it doesn't seem Wayland does offer those improvements.
    Why is that?
    Is it just because Wayland isn't ready yet or maybe the promise was big but in practice it doesn't really matter?

    Leave a comment:

  • TheBlackCat
    Senior Member

  • TheBlackCat
    replied
    Originally posted by Royi View Post
    What should be Wayland advantage over the current solution that everybody is looking for Wayland support?
    X11 was designed when display systems worked very, very differently than today. They tacked a somewhat more modern system on top of that, but it still has most of the old stuff, and even the new stuff requires using a lot of the old stuff. This results in everything being much slower, more complicated, and more limited than what is actually needed, and it means you are still running a ton of useless stuff you don't need, and it means that literally nobody in the world really understands how the whole thing works.

    Wayland, on the other hand, is designed from the ground up to support modern display systems in the way they are actually used. The X11 developers and the developers using X11, such as desktop environment developers, got together and figured out exactly what they really needed, and how to put it together in a sustainable way. That is Wayland.

    Originally posted by Royi View Post
    Does Wayland, in practice, deliver what it should?
    Yes, but it is taking time for the desktop environments to implement it. X11 has been around for a very, very long time. A lot of stuff was built with the assumption that it would always be around, and fixing that stuff takes time. Wayland itself has been in good shape for a few years now, but it takes time to port all the old code to run on it. Luckily X11 applications can still run under Wayland, but they won't get all the benefits of Wayland.

    Leave a comment:

  • Royi
    Senior Member

  • Royi
    replied
    What should be Wayland advantage over the current solution that everybody is looking for Wayland support?
    Does Wayland, in practice, deliver what it should?

    Leave a comment:

  • crazyloglad
    Junior Member

  • crazyloglad
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
    Wait... Does Arcan use its own protocol/API??
    API - yes (and protocol - soon, but that is strictly for network transparency), but the categorization you use above doesn't fit its architecture or division of labor at all.

    Leave a comment:

  • tildearrow
    Senior Member

  • tildearrow
    replied
    It's time to resolve the confusion.

    Protocols: X11, Wayland.

    Display servers: X.Org, the many Wayland compositors.

    Compositors: KWin, Mutter, GNOME Shell (sadly they run the compositor and shell in the same thread!), Sway, Way Cooler, Mir, Weston, waybox, Phosh.

    Libraries to implement compositors: libweston, WLC, wlroots, MirAL.

    Examples:

    - X.Org implements X11.

    - Compositors like KWin use X11 to run on X.Org.

    - Compositors like KWin implement Wayland.

    - Compositors like Sway and waybox use wlroots, which implements Wayland.

    Mir had its own protocol (or API I think), but they dropped it when they began to seek implementing Wayland.
    They say "Wayland compatibility", but after all, Wayland compositors too are "Wayland compatible".

    There is no "Wayland" standard display server. Wayland is implemented by compositors, which are display servers at the same time.

    P. S. This is the time where Phoronix forums should merge the Wayland and Mir sections since it only causes more confusion...

    Originally posted by Vistaus View Post
    Arcan...
    Wait... Does Arcan use its own protocol/API??
    tildearrow
    Senior Member
    Last edited by tildearrow; 21 September 2018, 03:53 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • Guest
    Guest replied
    I've just read all the comments. Results: Xorg, Mir, Weston, Wayland, Mutter, Gnome, Kde, etc., all of them are telling me to write myself a whole desktop manager using tkinter. Sorry, a lot of confusion (not in me).

    Leave a comment:

  • Vistaus
    Senior Member

  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by Scellow View Post

    Gnome is trash, Wayland is even worse
    I like Wayland a lot better than X, so I wouldn't call it trash. However, it's not *the* solution. Still waiting for DE's to start supporting Arcan...

    Leave a comment:

  • tildearrow
    Senior Member

  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by Spazturtle View Post

    Wayland is a protocol, you still need a display server to support it. Mir is a display server that supports wayland. You are running GNOME on Weston (another display server that supports wayland).
    He is running GNOME in "Wayland protocol implementation" mode.

    Leave a comment:

  • tildearrow
    Senior Member

  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    I have no idea what this is good for.

    I guess I'll be running GNOME on Wayland.
    It will be good for building Wayland compositors easily, in a wlroots-like way.

    Leave a comment:

  • jokeyrhyme
    Junior Member

  • jokeyrhyme
    replied
    If it was always this feasible to make Mir speak Wayland, it seems super weird that Canonical kept fighting Wayland all this time
    Maybe Mir would have seen more adoption and broader distribution support if Canonical had actually funded Wayland compatibility earlier in the project

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X