The Performance Penalty Of Xfce/Xubuntu On XMir

[dee.]

mir is different from wayland, mir is a API while wayland is a protocol and mir can handle 3d inputs like leap motion while wayland can not (last time i checked.)
also mir is under canocial CLA wich means they can relicense it to fit the needs of the drivers. and making a wayland app running under mir shouldnt be hard, just make a WMir ( like XMir ) and u can run any wayland under mir ( i dont know if it would work on MWayland ( mir on wayland) becuase it cant handle 3d input unless the software dosent require it.
if this is done right there should be nearly no overhead from this.
i might be wrong i dont deal with drivers.

No, not exactly. Wayland is a protocol, with a library (libwayland) that contains all the interfaces which define the protocol. Wayland does have an API, in libwayland. This library allows developers to write Wayland clients and Wayland compositors, so that they all use the libwayland library in order to implement the Wayland protocol. The Wayland protocol has a stable API with guaranteed backwards compatibility, this means if you write any wayland program (client or compositor) that uses the Wayland protocol as it is now, it will work with all future versions of Wayland. Wayland does not dictate what compositor you should use, there's an example/reference compositor called "weston" but in practice, every DE will probably write their own compositor. Wayland allows this, because it doesn't dictate a single way of doing things, only a very smartly designed protocol to enable different designs for different needs. Wayland is designed to suit the purposes of a large range of operating systems, from desktop to mobile devices and even onboard computers on cars (IvI systems).

In contrast, Mir does not have a stable protocol. It doesn't need one, because Canonical doesn't have to worry about compatibility. For Mir, there is no protocol, there's just the Mir server - which is developed entirely for the needs of Unity, with no concern about other desktops. So if someone wanted to make their desktop environment support Mir, they'd have two options: one, use Canonical's Mir server - and continuously play catch-up when Canonical inevitably changes the API's for the needs of Unity. Or two, make their own implementation of Mir server - and continuously play catch-up to keep the API's compatible with Canonical's (Canonical has stated they don't intend to worry about compatibility if someone else uses Mir, they only care about Unity). Or, they could just fork Mir and don't worry about compatibility with Canonical's version - but at that point, why bother, they might as well just use Wayland, which at least provides a stable protocol and API.

As for licensing, that's not a good reason for Mir's existence either: as Wayland is a protocol, Canonical could easily have written their own Wayland compositor and keep it under whatever license and CLA they wanted. No problem whatsoever.

And as for 3d inputs - let's be honest, who really uses that kind of stuff? And there's absolutely no reason why they couldn't be used with Wayland. Eventually, if there is need for it, support for them will be implemented for Wayland, if it hasn't already been, but a niche thing like that probably isn't a high priority for anyone.

[MrTheSoulz]

I read somewhere that Hitler has a base in Antarctica.

i read somewhere that people like u dont have a life, is it true? oh wait you just comfirmed it since u posted something completly useless, unless you know better can can correct me go play with the dog or watch porn, mean while will be here trying to learn something

[mrugiero]

mir is different from wayland, mir is a API while wayland is a protocol and mir can handle 3d inputs like leap motion while wayland can not (last time i checked.)

Can Mir? Last mail I received from the dev list was one developer saying he feels he did no progress in 12 hours of attempts to make a proposal for input handling, in general, leave alone knowing how to handle 3D input.

also mir is under canocial CLA wich means they can relicense it to fit the needs of the drivers.

"Fit the needs of the drivers." Last time I checked, you needed the driver to support your display server, not the other way around.
On relicensing, Wayland is MIT license, which means *anyone* can relicense.

and making a wayland app running under mir shouldnt be hard, just make a WMir ( like XMir ) and u can run any wayland under mir ( i dont know if it would work on MWayland ( mir on wayland) becuase it cant handle 3d input unless the software dosent require it.
if this is done right there should be nearly no overhead from this.
i might be wrong i dont deal with drivers.

If you are going to support the Wayland protocol, then you are actually a Wayland compositor. If they'd wanted to do this, they'd went as a compositor to begin with, and would have any extension they needed.
If you don't support the protocol, Wayland clients can't run.
It's worth to note that a compositor might expose another API for custom desktop apps. I guess nobody will do it that way because it makes more sense to implement such API as another library, so it might be compatible with other desktops (you just need to install the library).

im not saying it does (ATM) im saying it can...
its better to be able to do it then not :P

EDIT: and if im not work it could also be used to make a kinitect controler since it is a 3d input.

It can, or it can't? Wayland can be extended, too. But does any of them, Mir or Wayland, currently handle 3D input, or have a design for doing so?
On kinect, I think there is a controller out there.

then your doing the same mistake X did...
theres a diference betwen designed for doing it or add it later.
X was designed for doing one thing then they kept adding and adding untill its a complete mess.
if they are doing the same mistake X did its only a matter of time untill this becomes crappy like X.

As I answered to a previous quote, there is no 'designed for doing it' yet, there isn't even a proposal on how to do it.

[blackout23]

i read somewhere that people like u dont have a life, is it true? oh wait you just comfirmed it since u posted something completly useless, unless you know better can can correct me go play with the dog or watch porn, mean while will be here trying to learn something

Maybe you should be the one delivering proof, when claiming something? Ever thought about that?

[LinuxGamer]

i read somewhere that people like u dont have a life, is it true? oh wait you just comfirmed it since u posted something completly useless, unless you know better can can correct me go play with the dog or watch porn, mean while will be here trying to learn something

useless as in like your Pro Mir Comments? or useless as in like Xmir?

[Awesomeness]

Because it's a potential candidate to the successor of X.org. Right now it's a race between wayland and mir, and while mir is younger and less supported by the community, it's catching up really fast.

X.org is vendor neutral, Mir is not. Mir is a Canonical project with special rights exclusively for Canonical. No matter how good Mir eventually may become, it cannot ever be a X.org successor.

Wayland, just like X.org, is vendor neutral. Not only that but Wayland also shares X.org's freedesktop.org affiliation as well as X.org's licensing.

[MrTheSoulz]

No, not exactly. Wayland is a protocol, with a library (libwayland) that contains all the interfaces which define the protocol. Wayland does have an API, in libwayland. This library allows developers to write Wayland clients and Wayland compositors, so that they all use the libwayland library in order to implement the Wayland protocol. The Wayland protocol has a stable API with guaranteed backwards compatibility, this means if you write any wayland program (client or compositor) that uses the Wayland protocol as it is now, it will work with all future versions of Wayland. Wayland does not dictate what compositor you should use, there's an example/reference compositor called "weston" but in practice, every DE will probably write their own compositor. Wayland allows this, because it doesn't dictate a single way of doing things, only a very smartly designed protocol to enable different designs for different needs. Wayland is designed to suit the purposes of a large range of operating systems, from desktop to mobile devices and even onboard computers on cars (IvI systems).

In contrast, Mir does not have a stable protocol. It doesn't need one, because Canonical doesn't have to worry about compatibility. For Mir, there is no protocol, there's just the Mir server - which is developed entirely for the needs of Unity, with no concern about other desktops. So if someone wanted to make their desktop environment support Mir, they'd have two options: one, use Canonical's Mir server - and continuously play catch-up when Canonical inevitably changes the API's for the needs of Unity. Or two, make their own implementation of Mir server - and continuously play catch-up to keep the API's compatible with Canonical's (Canonical has stated they don't intend to worry about compatibility if someone else uses Mir, they only care about Unity). Or, they could just fork Mir and don't worry about compatibility with Canonical's version - but at that point, why bother, they might as well just use Wayland, which at least provides a stable protocol and API.

As for licensing, that's not a good reason for Mir's existence either: as Wayland is a protocol, Canonical could easily have written their own Wayland compositor and keep it under whatever license and CLA they wanted. No problem whatsoever.

And as for 3d inputs - let's be honest, who really uses that kind of stuff? And there's absolutely no reason why they couldn't be used with Wayland. Eventually, if there is need for it, support for them will be implemented for Wayland, if it hasn't already been, but a niche thing like that probably isn't a high priority for anyone.

now this is a usefull reply, thanks!

[dee.]

i see ppl talking about wayland, mir its not needed because wayland... well where is wayland? where is working wayland?

Right now, there's Rebecca Black OS. The Sailfish SDK. The upcoming Jolla phone at the end of the year will use Wayland. Tizen will use Wayland. Every major DE and distro other than Ubuntu will use Wayland.

Where is working Mir? Nowhere, it's just a twinkle in Shuttleworth's eye right now. Running a DE on XMir doesn't count, it's just a hack, that could just as well be done with XWayland but no one is stupid enough to do it, because it's stupid to do so.

i thing the real probleam for the people who don t wants mir is their on "asses". stop with destructive criticism and wait to see what will come out of there.

I?m not a fanboy, I?m not a hater, i use fedora a long time ago and i change to arch them to ubuntu them to xubuntu and now i use ubuntu 13.04 gain brains and use what hell you want and stop with this stupid things

No, the problem is that Mir is creating problems for everyone and is entirely pointless. There's no good reason for its existence.

[Andrecorreia]

joke?

I can Say you did not really read my Post and heres "My Wayland" https://sailfishos.org/

lol this a joke write? and i can t understand your point, precisas duma vitaminas para esse cerebro jovem, n?o ?s muito esperto

[MrTheSoulz]

unless as your Pro Mir Comments? or unless as Xmir?

unless as your Pro Mir Comments = useless as your Pro Mir Comments? if so:

im not in love with either mir or wayland, im a neutral in here trying to learn.
you dont see me flaming either wayland or mir and i wont at least untill they are both finished and can actuly be compared to each other, comparing mir or btw wayland to x at this point is a waste of time since non of them are finished products.

or unless as Xmir = or useless as Xmir? if so:
i dont see why mir is useless.
if not more is testing mir and giving a change for cpu vendors to get theyr drivers ready and get feedback from people who can actuly say something good and arent just writing for war fun.