Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chromium's Ozone Wayland Back-End Is Now Considered Beta, Aiming To Ship Next Year

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chromium's Ozone Wayland Back-End Is Now Considered Beta, Aiming To Ship Next Year

    Phoronix: Chromium's Ozone Wayland Back-End Is Now Considered Beta, Aiming To Ship Next Year

    For years there has been work on a Wayland back-end to Ozone, the Google component for abstracting user-interface elements and input/window handling among other tasks across platforms. It looks like in 2020 the Ozone Wayland support will be in good standing and promoted out of beta...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...land-Next-Year

  • timrichardson
    replied
    Originally posted by carewolf View Post
    Don't reply if you don't understand my comment. It exist, but is a separate build exactly as a I said. Separate build means separate binaries, instead of having everything work from a single binary.

    To eloborate. Chromium has traditionally had multiple backends that are selected at configure time before building. So you select X11, macOS or Windows, etc. They have tried to replace that with a backend that can be replaced at runtime called Ozone, so if you configure and built Chromium on Ozone, it can use multiple Ozone backends at runtime. Wayland has been implemented as an Ozone backend and thus requires an Ozone build of Chromium. Unfortunately the main builds of Chromium still use the direct X11 backend instead of Ozone with Ozone-X11 backend. The result of this is that an Ozone build works poorly with X11, so you have one binary with direct X11 usage, and one with Ozone usage that can support Wayland. And the default is the direct X11 using one.
    thanks, that was helpful.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by timrichardson View Post

    Firefox can't do hardware video decoding.
    The OP said "or".

    Leave a comment:


  • Vistaus
    replied
    Originally posted by Britoid View Post

    So Firefox or GNOME Web?
    Falkon also supports Wayland almost 100% now.

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    I'd really like to try this on Arch but unfortunately there are no [working] pre-built packages, even from the AUR. You need a pretty beefy computer to compile this. I attempted to do so with my old laptop with an i3 and 8GB of RAM, and after 2.5 hours it failed because I ran out of memory.

    Leave a comment:


  • latalante
    replied
    Originally posted by carewolf View Post
    Don't reply if you don't understand my comment. It exist, but is a separate build exactly as a I said. Separate build means separate binaries, instead of having everything work from a single binary.

    To eloborate. Chromium has traditionally had multiple backends that are selected at configure time before building. So you select X11, macOS or Windows, etc. They have tried to replace that with a backend that can be replaced at runtime called Ozone, so if you configure and built Chromium on Ozone, it can use multiple Ozone backends at runtime. Wayland has been implemented as an Ozone backend and thus requires an Ozone build of Chromium. Unfortunately the main builds of Chromium still use the direct X11 backend instead of Ozone with Ozone-X11 backend. The result of this is that an Ozone build works poorly with X11, so you have one binary with direct X11 usage, and one with Ozone usage that can support Wayland. And the default is the direct X11 using one.
    Do not mix.
    I am talking about chromium with support for native wayland and only about it.
    Code:
    chromium --ozone-platform=wayland
    Users of i386 architecture are injured because they can't run binaries compatible with x86_64?
    Users choose Wayland consciously and they have limitations in mind. They are looking for fully native solutions.

    I am not afraid to install a special version.

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    This is great, as it will also benefit all Electron-based projects such as Atom, Skype, Spotify, Visual Studio Code, Azure Data Studio, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • carewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by latalante View Post

    Don't mix if you don't know something.
    Fork Chromium with Wayland backend support has been around for years.
    https://github.com/intel/ozone-wayland
    https://github.com/intel/ozone-wayla...g/32.0.1700.69
    It is now part of the Chromium project.
    Don't reply if you don't understand my comment. It exist, but is a separate build exactly as a I said. Separate build means separate binaries, instead of having everything work from a single binary.

    To eloborate. Chromium has traditionally had multiple backends that are selected at configure time before building. So you select X11, macOS or Windows, etc. They have tried to replace that with a backend that can be replaced at runtime called Ozone, so if you configure and built Chromium on Ozone, it can use multiple Ozone backends at runtime. Wayland has been implemented as an Ozone backend and thus requires an Ozone build of Chromium. Unfortunately the main builds of Chromium still use the direct X11 backend instead of Ozone with Ozone-X11 backend. The result of this is that an Ozone build works poorly with X11, so you have one binary with direct X11 usage, and one with Ozone usage that can support Wayland. And the default is the direct X11 using one.
    Last edited by carewolf; 12-05-2019, 08:53 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • latalante
    replied
    Originally posted by carewolf View Post

    Yes, but it is a different build of Chromium. You either build it for Ozone or for X11. You can theoretically use an Ozone X11 backend but it works poorly upstream.
    Don't mix if you don't know something.
    Fork Chromium with Wayland backend support has been around for years.
    https://github.com/intel/ozone-wayland
    https://github.com/intel/ozone-wayla...g/32.0.1700.69
    It is now part of the Chromium project.

    Leave a comment:


  • Britoid
    replied
    Originally posted by timrichardson View Post

    Firefox can't do hardware video decoding. Something else that may happen in 2020, but more likely 2021 in my opinion. There is no sight of it.
    It's easy to get video decoding in Chromium, most distributions have an easily available build. I've been using it for 12 months on Ubuntu. I have no idea if this Wayland back end will break this, but I think we'll be ok considering that hardware decoding works on ChromeOS (in proper Chrome) and that's not X.
    So I bet Chrome/Chromium will beat Firefox to native Wayland + hardware decoding.
    The OP said "or". Firefox has full Wayland support (it's a bit buggy though). FIrefox also added dmabuf support recently which is a pre-requisuite to decent hw decoding support.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X