Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

XWayland 21.1 Release Candidate Offers Split From The X.Org Server

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

  • #31
    Finally. Xorg and Xserver had been nothing but pain.

    I don't wish to ever relive those days where the xserver refused to start and Xorg -configure returned all manner of obscure errors that simply could not be fixed or addressed to obtain a working graphical desktop. Which I experienced again first hand when trying out both FreeBSD 12-CURRENT and FreeBSD 13-BETA.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by duby229 View Post

      EDIT: Almost -all- Linux applications are running on xwayland when in a Wayland session. There are only a handful of exceptions and most of those handful are buggy as hell. Hence the -entire- reason why 94% of all linux users are still on xorg...
      That is funny; I have been running wayfire on one of my vts for a while now, and I turned off xwayland support. Almost everything seems to run just fine native wayland style. Browsers, office suite, image viewers, terminals, video stuff....etc. There _are_ some X-only programs, but most modern applications are written using one of the several toolkits that support wayland out of the box. Most Linux users are running X now, because that was the default. And those who are not curious to test new stuff will probably keep running X until their distro changes the default to something else.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by muncrief View Post
        Well, it doesn't appear that there's ever going to be a "drop in" Wayland replacement for X. Wayland was first released 9 years ago, and XWayland 7 years ago. And yet even the developers still have great difficulty with it.
        That was never the intention, sorry that it took almost a decade for you to understant that. Supporting Wayland basically requires every single application to be patched for it. Sure, at least for Qt and GTK-based apps it's mostly very painless: just let the toolkit do all the heavy lifting. But even after that many apps simply cannot work, because they try to do something that Wayland explicitly forbids. Apps like screen recorders and others that want to access the "global state" which doesn't really exist anymore in the same way.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by muncrief View Post
          I'm primarily referring to the issues with KDE and XFCE mppix , but also with all other things that aren't Gnome. If XWayland was a drop in replacement for X, which is how it was initially presented, it would just work with everything.
          Sounds like a misunderstanding on your part. Xwayland is a drop-in for running Xorg apps on Wayland, but even then you first need the Wayland session to exist. And after that Xwayland and the primary Wayland session somehow need to interact, which probably requires some additional work implemented in the Wayland host.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by curfew View Post
            That was never the intention, sorry that it took almost a decade for you to understant that. Supporting Wayland basically requires every single application to be patched for it. Sure, at least for Qt and GTK-based apps it's mostly very painless: just let the toolkit do all the heavy lifting. But even after that many apps simply cannot work, because they try to do something that Wayland explicitly forbids. Apps like screen recorders and others that want to access the "global state" which doesn't really exist anymore in the same way.
            Yeah, plus the other dozens of scenarios that don't work anymore. That's not a misunderstanding, that's a fact.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by mppix View Post
              Xwayland runs on top of Wayland. Therefore, a Xwayland based Xserver is a Wayland compositor.....
              Is a text editor running on Wayland a compositor? No.

              My understanding is that apps draw themselves inside Xwayland but after that Xwayland itself delegates the actual rendering to the compositor it's attached to. In other words Xwayland is sort of a virtual screen but doesn't manage outputting to the real display.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                Yeah, plus the other dozens of scenarios that don't work anymore. That's not a misunderstanding, that's a fact.
                Misunderstanding is when you expect something else that contradicts the facts.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                  Hence the -entire- reason why 94% of all linux users are still on xorg...
                  Could you please provide the audited source reference (from a reputable research firm) for that number.....

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

                    It very likely is going to be implemented as a compositor (due to the Wayland architecture, you have to implement an entire compositor to do anything). But either way, it will ultimately be an Xserver. Basically just a more stripped down re-implementation of Xorg. I personally am fine with that.

                    Sure, they might screw it up, but it probably still wont be any more annoying than Xsun to deal with.
                    If it can't do mixed-dpi properly, no one will take this seriously. The wayland protocol solves two big problems for desktop users: security, and mixed DPI. Over time, more Linux desktops will confront or adopt mixed DPI situations. As for security, X should send shivers down your spine.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by mppix View Post
                      The X window system was developed in the 80s and 90s. However similar to VNC, its governing bodies are defunct and the protocol cannot be changed anymore. Any change would result in a non-conformant implementation.
                      Interoperability matters only when there are multiple servers to talk to. With X there is only X.org Server left standing, so it can do whatever it wants, really. The procol has been changed, *erm*, "extended" many times over recent years by modules such as DRI3.
                      Last edited by curfew; 18 February 2021, 12:54 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X