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?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Mir 1.0 Released For "Next-Generation of Graphical Solutions"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Royi View PostWhat should be Wayland advantage over the current solution that everybody is looking for Wayland support?
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 PostDoes Wayland, in practice, deliver what it should?
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by tildearrow View PostWait... Does Arcan use its own protocol/API??
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
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 PostArcan...Last edited by tildearrow; 21 September 2018, 03:53 PM.
- Likes 7
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedI'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:
-
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).
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by uid313 View PostI have no idea what this is good for.
I guess I'll be running GNOME on Wayland.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
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
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: