Wayland Clients Can Now Survive Qt Wayland Crashes / Compositor Restarts

[RahulSundaram]

Yes but Weston is not used as a desktop, and I am talking about desktop environments here and also Wayland was sold to desktop environments so I am not sure what point you are making here unless you are arguing that Wayland was originally meant to target a completely different market than desktop environments?

Wayland and Weston was never exclusively targeted towards desktop environments. It is just one of many use cases and by far the smallest one. Commercial linux usage on non desktop systems are a much bigger market, so calling components used there heavily just a demo is silly. Desktop linux eventually gets some features tricked down potentially but this isn't the primary target for any commercial vendor. None of this should be a surprise to anybody.

[JPFSanders]

Ah, again the "it's just a protocol" cop-out. It never fails.
What i want to point out is, the "tools you take for granted" are reusable across toolkits and DEs. That doesn't seem to hold true for anything Wayland-related. There's wlroots, but it seems to cover very, very little, seeing as how major toolkits/DEs still have to fend for themselves.

HTTP is also a protocol, and Chrome and Firefox have their own respective implementation of Rendering engines, networking code, etc.

Yes the situation with Wayland is absolute SHIT, one of the biggest software fiascos on any operating system ever. That is what I personally think. But this is the problem of rewriting things from scratch rather than fixing what's in use. Just imagine if to solve any of the Linux kernel shortcomings Torwalds decided tomorrow to rewrite from scratch.

To comprehend how big of a fiasco Wayland is: Imagine that tomorrow Google decides to discontinue Chrome, and to produce a successor they create a new protocol called HTTP-SUPER-9000 after 5 years they come with the new protocol, and a bare-bones browser that they call the reference implementation with 20%-30% of the functionality that the user base requires. And 13 years later we're not much better and everybody continues using Chrome that nobody maintains any-more because is going to be retired. And all of this with the assumption that not only other people will create better implementations of browsers that can use the HTTP-SUPER-9000 but also expects the entire internet to rewrite all websites so they can take advantage of its many benefits while they add shortcomings like not being able to copy and paste in all situations.

IMHO X.org should have been fixed, re-architectured to support X11 and a new X12 (let's call it that), as painful as it would have been in a way that would have allowed to keep the new code separate from the X11 part but little by little accommodating everything. Something akin to Pipewire which allows any pulse applications from continuing working unmodified. Maybe I'm talking garbage but rather than having xwayland to run X11 in wayland having "xserver-xorg-vwayland" to make wayland a new protocol in X.org.

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken 13 years, and by now we would have had something resembling an usable X12 system even with all the NVidia shenanigans. Even Windows managed to improve their desktop infrastructure massively in the last 13 years while allowing one to take screenshots and RDP never stopped working. (I'm not defending windows here)

The positives are that X.org is still there, it is stable and works even if it is not perfect. And Wayland is making progress, slowly but progress nonetheless.

Sorry for the venting.

[Barnacle]

Nobody is willing to sponsor core wayland or X developers. That's why they decided to have the minimal amount of scope there, and it's why anything that needs to get into wayland takes so long, because there's no manpower there to do it. Just like why getting something like HDR into X has taken forever, because no one is paying people to make it happen.

In no way, does the Wayland devs refusal to fix their broken standard have anything to do with funding. Funding lets people quit their day jobs and get something done faster. When they refuse to even begin the journey of going down the path towards fixing this dumpster fire, that is not a funding problem.

The only thing they did was create a horrible standard that deviates far from how Windows and MacOS (99% of the desktop market) operate, with the cons of their invention greatly outweighing the pros, and then told everybody else that implementing it was their problem. And they will not cave to anybody's pressure to fix the glaring design flaws or address any of the gaps they left by deciding various X11 features are "out of scope".

[Weasel]

No, there are no examples in your post. Just ranting.

Not my problem you can't read.

Hotkeys was already done by the DEs, which usually are very tight to the compositor. They just moved that stuff into the compositor. Not that much change, tbh.

I don't care about compositor hotkeys. I have those on X11 as well and barely use. I'm talking about SMART "hotkeys" (they're not even hotkeys, I did mention that, again, helps to read, which you clearly can't).

Do you know how auto completion / filling works? You don't press any specific hotkeys. In my case you program it in a smart script for your use cases.

There is also a protocol extension under discussion to enable this for 3rd party apps as well.

I don't want simple hotkeys ffs. And yes, that's not even in the protocol yet, so it does suck right now. And it will still suck since it's not what I want. I want scripted ability to listen to key presses and act based on windows/controls being active and whatever. Power user scripting.

The fact Wayland cannot do this shows how crippled it is by design when everything else can. I'm not talking X11 here, I mean everything else on the desktop. God damn.

The other stuff isn't really anything major.

And who are you to decide that? The stuff above is saving me HOURS of work (something that can take 1 minute is done in 3 seconds or less, and I do it repeatedly when working). I've posted about it before, not gonna waste time again.

AutoHotkey (on Windows, but works in Wine too) is probably more popular in usage than all your Wayland users combined.

The major work to be done is in other areas, which mostly touch new features like HDR.

HDR is a complete non factor for me. This is your "major" point? yawn.

I'm a power user, not a mobile peasant who just wants to watch movies on his fucking phone.

[mdedetrich]

Wayland and Weston was never exclusively targeted towards desktop environments. It is just one of many use cases and by far the smallest one. Commercial linux usage on non desktop systems are a much bigger market, so calling components used there heavily just a demo is silly. Desktop linux eventually gets some features tricked down potentially but this isn't the primary target for any commercial vendor. None of this should be a surprise to anybody.

Well maybe you should tell the Wayland devs that then, especially considering that they "stopped" supporting X11/xorg and basically told (aka "forced") the Linux desktop community to move onto Wayland.

[RahulSundaram]

Well maybe you should tell the Wayland devs that then, especially considering that they "stopped" supporting X11/xorg and basically told (aka "forced") the Linux desktop community to move onto Wayland.

The reason they don't want to work on Xorg is simple. All the major commercial distros already use Wayland by default now and they are fine with compatibility provided by XWayland.

[mdedetrich]

The reason they don't want to work on Xorg is simple. All the major commercial distros already use Wayland by default now and they are fine with compatibility provided by XWayland.

Firstly your point is contradictory. Beforehand you said that Wayland wasn't designed for linux desktop, now you are implicitly implying that it is since desktop distros were using it as a default (which btw isn't entirely true because at that time when the announcement was made there was quite a few distros not defaulting to Wayland, Manjaro for example).

I am sorry, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. To me this whole "wayland was never designed for Linux desktop" is some vain sleight of hand attempt to try and avoid admitting that they way it was handled was far from ideal.

[bug77]

HTTP is also a protocol, and Chrome and Firefox have their own respective implementation of Rendering engines, networking code, etc.

Yes the situation with Wayland is absolute SHIT, one of the biggest software fiascos on any operating system ever. That is what I personally think. But this is the problem of rewriting things from scratch rather than fixing what's in use. Just imagine if to solve any of the Linux kernel shortcomings Torwalds decided tomorrow to rewrite from scratch.

To comprehend how big of a fiasco Wayland is: Imagine that tomorrow Google decides to discontinue Chrome, and to produce a successor they create a new protocol called HTTP-SUPER-9000 after 5 years they come with the new protocol, and a bare-bones browser that they call the reference implementation with 20%-30% of the functionality that the user base requires. And 13 years later we're not much better and everybody continues using Chrome that nobody maintains any-more because is going to be retired. And all of this with the assumption that not only other people will create better implementations of browsers that can use the HTTP-SUPER-9000 but also expects the entire internet to rewrite all websites so they can take advantage of its many benefits while they add shortcomings like not being able to copy and paste in all situations.

IMHO X.org should have been fixed, re-architectured to support X11 and a new X12 (let's call it that), as painful as it would have been in a way that would have allowed to keep the new code separate from the X11 part but little by little accommodating everything. Something akin to Pipewire which allows any pulse applications from continuing working unmodified. Maybe I'm talking garbage but rather than having xwayland to run X11 in wayland having "xserver-xorg-vwayland" to make wayland a new protocol in X.org.

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken 13 years, and by now we would have had something resembling an usable X12 system even with all the NVidia shenanigans. Even Windows managed to improve their desktop infrastructure massively in the last 13 years while allowing one to take screenshots and RDP never stopped working. (I'm not defending windows here)

The positives are that X.org is still there, it is stable and works even if it is not perfect. And Wayland is making progress, slowly but progress nonetheless.

Sorry for the venting.

I am totally with you. Wayland promised a replacement for X, but made it went probably the worst way about it. They didn't just come up with an improved protocol. And they didn't come up with an improved architecture. They went for changing both the protocol and the architecture at the same time (all the while kicking out features people used left and right). Anyone that knows a little bit about engineering, software or otherwise, knows changing multiple things at the same time is just a recipe for disaster.

As an example of things done right, Apple wrote Carbon so that people could migrate older applications seamlessly. And then went on to replace Carbon with Cocoa, without end users even knowing about it. None of this "this is insecure" or "that is not my responsibility anymore" nonsense.

[RahulSundaram]

Firstly your point is contradictory. Beforehand you said that Wayland wasn't designed for linux desktop

No, I absolutely never said that. I said it wasn't designed exclusively for it and other use cases matter more commercially.

now you are implicitly implying that it is since desktop distros were using it as a default (which btw isn't entirely true because at that time when the announcement was made there was quite a few distros not defaulting to Wayland, Manjaro for example).

Again, read what you are quoting. What I said is entirely true. I said major commercial distributions are already using Wayland by default. I didn't say all desktop distros.

[mdedetrich]

No, I absolutely never said that. I said it wasn't designed exclusively for it and other use cases matter more commercially.

Thats what you were implying otherwise why bring it up, its completely irrelevant.

No one cares that Weston is being used in kiosks, we are talking about Linux desktop here and Waylands integration into Linux desktop and the point I was making is that there was no serious implementation of Wayland for linux desktop.

Bringing up that Weston was used in largely unrelated area just derailed the whole conversation, good job.

Again, read what you are quoting. What I said is entirely true. I said major commercial distributions are already using Wayland by default. I didn't say all desktop distros.

Entirely true but also entirely irrelevant. What exactly are you trying to argue here, we are talking about Linux desktop here. No one cares that Wayland was developed by Red Hat for their commercial clients, in fact that makes the whole thing worse because it just shows the priorities for Wayland was completely out of wack at least for Linux desktop which is how it was being sold to the community.