Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Hat Developing New xwayland-run & wlheadless-run Utilities

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

  • Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

    Fair point. Unfortunately, I can't continue this conversation right now because I woke up with a "now that you got enough sleep, here is how much sleep debt you still need to pay back" headache and my brain is giving me timeouts when I try to figure out whether I have a URL to give you.
    I appreciate your effort on a good faith conversation and I hope you feel better soon. No rush on the URL. If you find it, feel free to drop a link. If not, it's no big deal. It's nothing more than a mild curiosity at this point.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by anda_skoa View Post

      No, the exact opposite!

      I was pointing out that if one doesn't read the article carefully it will give that impression.
      This misinterpretation might even have been the intent, but this is just my personal speculation.

      If one pays attention it clearly spells out how limited the X11 approach was and how much more sensible and inline with other platform this can be handled with Wayland.

      The author mentions the difficulty on X11 of holding a grab on all inputs, to ensure that unlocked content is no longer show and the pain of implementing the unlocking in the screensaver which should not be involved with that at all.

      With Wayland input blocking and output blanking, locking and unlocking is no longer the concern of the screensaver which can full concentrate on its main purpose.
      The article mentions macOS as another system handling it that way and I think one of the comments says that Windows also handles these tasks in the system rather than burdening every screensaver with it.

      The author is way to knowledgeable to have written an ignorant "screensavers won't work on Wayland" rant that many seem to interpret it to be.

      It is rather an acknowledgment of how Wayland enables a separation of concerns that weren't possible with X11.

      Letting the system handle the locking/unlocking and letting the screensaver handle the dynamic content while the lock is active.
      Letting the screensaver developer handle the artistic and fun bits without even having to think about the gnarly bits as they have been taken care of by the system developers.

      Cheers,
      _
      yes, his point wasn't that x11 was designed properly, but that there was a way. in wayland, it's designed properly but there is no way. there is no mechanism for a screensaver to be triggered on user idleness and have control of the display and for the display manager to provide an unlock screen. theres no way to do it the right way and theres no way to do it the wrong way.

      this is why his screensaver, which has existed for 30 years and is available on every platform on earth, isn't available for wayland.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by fitzie View Post
        this is why his screensaver, which has existed for 30 years and is available on every platform on earth, isn't available for wayland.
        You are incorrect about quite a few details there. XScreenSaver certainly does not work on Windows. Windows and Mac do not allow an arbitrary application to be a screensaver either. What XScreenSaver does on Mac is just leverage the built-in screensaver and Mac requires that functionality to be built-in for the compositor. Besides you must not be aware of https://wayland.app/protocols/ext-session-lock-v1 which allows for "secure session locking with arbitrary graphics" aka a screensaver.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by fitzie View Post
          yes, his point wasn't that x11 was designed properly, but that there was a way. in wayland, it's designed properly but there is no way
          Yet.

          It should be pretty easy to take any of the compositors, spawn a process on screen lock and hand over the surface handles via pipie or socket.

          Very likely far less code and far more trivial than any of the hacks currently needed on X11.

          Originally posted by fitzie View Post
          there is no mechanism for a screensaver to be triggered on user idleness
          I would be surprised if many of the desktop compositors did not have idle detection for their locking.

          Originally posted by fitzie View Post
          and for the display manager to provide an unlock screen
          If a compositor has support for locking, surely they will also already have support for unlocking?

          Both locking and unlocking would no longer be a burden for the screensaver developer to solve.

          Originally posted by fitzie View Post
          theres no way to do it the right way and theres no way to do it the wrong way.
          Sounds like the perfect opportunity to propose a solution that is the least burden for all involved developers and likely even aligned with what other platforms do.

          Usually much better than to wait for someone with less domain expertise to do it and then work within the limitations of that solution.

          Originally posted by fitzie View Post
          this is why his screensaver, which has existed for 30 years and is available on every platform on earth, isn't available for wayland.
          That sounds like a rather strange argument.
          It is highly unlikely that the same code works on all the supported platforms without the need for any platform specific bits, but running on Wayland should do without?

          It sounded as if the X11 implementation needed a lot of work outside of the primary domain due to lack in infrastructure.

          Cheers,
          _

          Comment


          • Originally posted by spicfoo View Post

            Let's see what an engineer actually told you.



            You have repeatedly claimed that no other distro is doing certification and this is false. Also now you admit it is "relatively stable" implying it still requires maintenance.
            Yeah, I read what he told and I perfectly understood it. Maybe there's some magic I failed to comprehend? I don't need no freaking link and words like "let's see". What exactly are you referring to? Don't be obtuse and don't try to look smart. Use arguments.

            Which distro other than RHEL does xorg certification?

            Please give me the appropriate links to the official websites. Suse, Ubuntu, Oracle, Debian, Mandriva, Arch, what have you.

            For fuck's sake please start using solid facts and drop "you're lying". That's not how argumentation works.

            I'm waiting.
            Last edited by avis; 03 December 2023, 06:50 AM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by avis View Post

              Yeah, I read what he told and I perfectly understood it.
              You either didn't understand it or you are knowingly making false claims. What he said was "Even if the design of graphics hardware never changed, the number of Xorg CVEs the graphics team handles is huge, and each is usually high severity and requires a massive amount of validation and testing"

              Richard Hughes was clearly talking about security fixes, not hardware certification. So who is going to do those security fixes for Xorg now according to you?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by avis View Post

                Which distro other than RHEL does xorg certification?

                Please give me the appropriate links to the official websites. Suse, Ubuntu, Oracle, Debian, Mandriva, Arch, what have you.
                There is no such that "Xorg certification". Every enterprise distribution does certification that makes sure all software they ship including but not limited to the kernel, Mesa, Xorg, Wayland etc is certified to work with a list of hardware they approve of. Since apparently you are unable to search for it, I will help you out. Here is a sample for you


                Ubuntu Certified Hardware has passed our extensive testing and review process, ensuring that Ubuntu runs optimally out of the box, ready for your organisation. Canonical provides continuous support throughout the lifecycle of the Ubuntu release to ensure quality, functionality, and maintenance for up to 10 years



                Are you willing to admit it when you are wrong yet?

                Comment


                • spicfoo

                  Thank you for the links.

                  Ubuntu: a number of desktop systems.
                  Oracle: zero desktop systems.
                  Suse: no information whatsoever.

                  Meanwhile redhat representatives have claimed their company has been the only one contributing to xorg recently. I trust their word more than any of the above three companies vapid certification claims and we've already established that only Ubuntu certifies desktop system and it's far from clear how and to what extent it's being done - until you find xorg server commits coming from Ubuntu developers showing real fixes, their claims of certification are worth nothing.

                  Again, let's be blunt, I claimed xorg doesn't require extensive maintenance that you and other Wayland proponents use a scapegoat of its depreciation and I still stand by the claim. Neither redhat, nor you, have conclusively shown any xorg server commits enabling it to run modern systems.

                  Please do. I hate when people parrot hearsay. Too many issues in the real world are caused by people accepting certain things for granted and then acting as if those things are valid and real when they are just pure effing BS.

                  Just today from two women both having master degrees I've heard that:
                  • Relatively modern vaccines are largely unsafe/untested and invariably lead to dire consequences (or can even kill you)
                  • You must drink at least 1.5 liters of pure water daily or your health will get worse.
                  Of course, no proofs, research, nothing has been provided.

                  And I've noticed that smaller communities absolutely love to perpetuate myths once told by a seemingly authoritative figure.

                  Linus circa 10 years ago said Fuck you Nvidia and it's become a meme or in reality a bane of the Linux community. 99% of people parroting this don't even know the circumstances of how it happened. Nvidia started to support Linux earlier and much better than AMD or Intel did. Yes, Nvidia doesn't want to open source their drivers, it's their inalienable right for fuck's sake. They owe Linux fans nothing. Just because you're a Linux user doesn't automatically mean that every IHV must bent for you and give you open source drivers.

                  And stop throwing "you're a liar" or "you're wrong". I have no qualms admitting that, one of rare such people here. I just love solid effing facts before I change my mind.

                  Linux fans on the other hand love myths.
                  Last edited by avis; 03 December 2023, 02:46 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by avis View Post
                    spicfoo

                    redhat representatives have claimed their company has been the only one contributing to xorg recently. I trust their word more than any of the above three companies vapid certification claims
                    .... Again, let's be blunt, I claimed xorg doesn't require extensive maintenance that you and other Wayland proponents use a scapegoat of its depreciation and I still stand by the claim. Neither redhat, nor you, have conclusively shown any xorg server commits.
                    According to you now, all the other vendors are lying when they publicly provide certification information and Richard Hughes from the graphics team at Red Hat is lying when he says Xorg requires substantial resources to maintain including regular high severity security fixes



                    Also according to you, Carolos, manager of that graphics team is also lying when he reaffirms this

                    One thing I saw in comments about the removal of xorg server is that some might not see how much work is/was to maintain xorg server. I understand is hard to see from outside, but maintaining xorg server with the standards we have in RHEL is not a small beast. Let me share some:


                    If you want to move the goal posts from certification and ignore all the security updates and focus now on git commits instead



                    If you really cared, go ahead and look instead of expecting more spoon fed links or continue to claim that everyone including Red Hat is lying and be a Xorg truther. Your choice. Ultimately, if Xorg server is so easy to maintain and you cared about helping other Xorg server users, you would step up to do it instead of speaking both sides of your mouth.

                    Comment


                    • I've asked to show specific commits spicfoo demonstrating HW enablement which RedHat claimed is the issue.

                      You've dumped a ton of text and not shown a single such commit.

                      I'm tired of vapid arguments. You've now posted at least six messages and not a single one of them contains a shred of evidence. You only refer to some posts and "someone said something". Sorry, that's not how argumentation works.

                      Have a nice day and I'll see myself off.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X