Casilda Is A New Project As A GTK4 Wayland Compositor Widget

[Artim]

you are right, it's a massive step back from insanity.

Says a lot that you call common sense and state of the art "insanity". Just that nothing of it is any kind of positive.

no they wont. There are many possible ways to do this, and that fact that we don't have to deal with cursed portals providers is a great benefit to a lot of people, myself included.

You mean lowlifes and government agencies that only are interested in spying on everything a user does without them noticing? Sure, that must be the reason why you only use Windows and haven't touched anything usable in over a decade.

LXQT is implementing as far as I know, 2 different protocols for this, possibly three. the fact that this is needed is the height of idiocy.

Again, what Taskbar do you mean? If you mean what Windows 11 heavily tried to get rid of, the need to implement several protocols is for backwards compatibility and has absolutely nothing to do with Wayland. Or what X11 protocol was supported by every app and DE/WM to achieve that? I don't know a single one. AppIndicator is an Ubuntu-only thing that of course can be used by other DEs/WMs if they want to. KStatusNotifierItem is a KDE-only thing that other DEs/WMs would have to add. But neither of them has any dependency on X11.

Just because you lack the ability to understand other people's viewpoints doesn't mean they are bad. It just means you have a deficiency in thought capacity.

Yes, if people are incapable of explaining their viewpoints with facts instead of irrational feelings, I will not understand it, but that's mostly a thing of refusing to instead of not wanting to. You notoriously complain with stating utter nonsense and only show that you don't have the first clue of what you are talking about. You refuse to bring forward any actual facts where Wayland actually is the "bad guy" and it's not a conscious design decision to build an actually modern displaying stack instead of just another ancient and unmaintainable pile of utter garbage. That you refuse to acknowledge that and that you need to sink as low as questioning other peoples thought capacity tells much more about you than about me, and again nothing of it is any kind of positive.

So unless you are capable of a constructive discussion based on facts and not feelings, the majority of users of this platform can only ask you once again to kindly screw yourself, fuck the hell off and stop spreading lies and hatred.

[Artim]

No, this is about combining the output of two or more processes into one.

Essentially the way every modern web browser works but available to normal application developers.

In case of web browsers one process to provide the main UI (menu, toolbars, etc) and one processes per open tab to provide the content.

Of course the same kind of separation is potentially interesting for other type of applications.
Could be used for more parallelism, isolation, etc.

Server side systems have been using this multi-process architectures for a very long time, this enables UIs to do the same.

A question that pops into mind while reading this explanation: could this also help with VMs? As in having both host and guest use only Wayland and the VMs UI display the native Windows of the guest, or is that better of using VNC, RDP or whatever?

[anda_skoa]

A question that pops into mind while reading this explanation: could this also help with VMs? As in having both host and guest use only Wayland and the VMs UI display the native Windows of the guest, or is that better of using VNC, RDP or whatever?

I guess a VM could provide such a nested compositor and inject the socket into the guest instead of having the guest run its own compositor.
However, usually you want VMs to be "emulated hardware" and let the guest run its software as "normal" as possible.

For use cases like "root less" virtualization you would want the opposite and expose the Wayland socket (or an additional one) to the container so that apps appear as if running on the host.

This is really about the reverse use case: making separate processes appear as one.

[Quackdoc]

Says a lot that you call common sense and state of the art "insanity". Just that nothing of it is any kind of positive.

there is nothing sane about requiring a third irrelevant process sitting in the background, needing to implement dbus or pull a dbus library, just to get basic screen capture

You mean lowlifes and government agencies that only are interested in spying on everything a user does without them noticing? Sure, that must be the reason why you only use Windows and haven't touched anything usable in over a decade.

If you can't imagine a way to secure this, then you lack imagination.

Again, what Taskbar do you mean? If you mean what Windows 11 heavily tried to get rid of, the need to implement several protocols is for backwards compatibility and has absolutely nothing to do with Wayland. Or what X11 protocol was supported by every app and DE/WM to achieve that? I don't know a single one. AppIndicator is an Ubuntu-only thing that of course can be used by other DEs/WMs if they want to. KStatusNotifierItem is a KDE-only thing that other DEs/WMs would have to add. But neither of them has any dependency on X11.

LXQT's I thought I made that clear when I said that LXQT was implementing it.

Yes, if people are incapable of explaining their viewpoints with facts instead of irrational feelings, I will not understand it, but that's mostly a thing of refusing to instead of not wanting to. You notoriously complain with stating utter nonsense and only show that you don't have the first clue of what you are talking about. You refuse to bring forward any actual facts where Wayland actually is the "bad guy" and it's not a conscious design decision to build an actually modern displaying stack instead of just another ancient and unmaintainable pile of utter garbage. That you refuse to acknowledge that and that you need to sink as low as questioning other peoples thought capacity tells much more about you than about me, and again nothing of it is any kind of positive.

I never insulted you. I said you lacked thought capacity, This is something that can be improved upon, and should be done so. I never said wayland is the "bad guy" nice imagination though.

So unless you are capable of a constructive discussion based on facts and not feelings, the majority of users of this platform can only ask you once again to kindly screw yourself, fuck the hell off and stop spreading lies and hatred.

considering you were literally too stupid to understand half what what I talked about, then claimed that my comment lacked substance and that I lacked understanding what what I was talking about, I would strongly suggest looking in a mirror first. I am insulting you know by the way, you seemed to struggle with the distinction so I thought it would be best to make myself clear this time so you could at least understand that much. Though please do tell me if I overestimated you, Im sure I can try and make it more easy to understand.

[Artim]

there is nothing sane about requiring a third irrelevant process sitting in the background, needing to implement dbus or pull a dbus library, just to get basic screen capture


If you can't imagine a way to secure this, then you lack imagination.


LXQT's I thought I made that clear when I said that LXQT was implementing it.


I never insulted you. I said you lacked thought capacity, This is something that can be improved upon, and should be done so. I never said wayland is the "bad guy" nice imagination though.


considering you were literally too stupid to understand half what what I talked about, then claimed that my comment lacked substance and that I lacked understanding what what I was talking about, I would strongly suggest looking in a mirror first. I am insulting you know by the way, you seemed to struggle with the distinction so I thought it would be best to make myself clear this time so you could at least understand that much. Though please do tell me if I overestimated you, Im sure I can try and make it more easy to understand.

Thanks for proving my point. How much does Microsoft pay you to insist on inferior technology that's even worse than what they do - and they already are lacking any common sense, not to mention sense for user security.