Originally posted by phoronix
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Wayland-Based Chromium Browser Released
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by intellivision View PostYet they have been consitently releasing a browser that uses far less memory than Chrome ever since v21, they also push for open internet standards such as ASM.js rather than NIH solutions such as NaCl, so I wouldn't be sayng that they have a 'mentality from the 90's'.
Comment
-
Originally posted by smitty3268 View PostFirefox can do a lot quickly on issues they care about, but linux integration has never been one of those. Anyone expecting quick Wayland support from Firefox needs to lower their expectations.
See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=738937
Aside from that looks like there has already been a bit of work done towards replacing GLX with EGL see: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=788319
So basically things are moving slowly but there seems to be no real push to get Firefox working on Wayland.
Comment
-
I?m curious about the amount of work needed to port an application to use Wayland. A team at Intel needed 2 months to partially port Chromium which already had an abstraction layer?
Also I never remember what problems Wayland is supposed to fix. I went to their web site to read some doc two days ago but nothing sticked in my mind.
Comment
-
Originally posted by stqn View PostI?m curious about the amount of work needed to port an application to use Wayland. A team at Intel needed 2 months to partially port Chromium which already had an abstraction layer?
Also I never remember what problems Wayland is supposed to fix. I went to their web site to read some doc two days ago but nothing sticked in my mind.
Comment
-
Originally posted by stqn View PostI?m curious about the amount of work needed to port an application to use Wayland. A team at Intel needed 2 months to partially port Chromium which already had an abstraction layer?
Also I never remember what problems Wayland is supposed to fix. I went to their web site to read some doc two days ago but nothing sticked in my mind.
Other than that, there is an additional difficulty in case the browser's toolkit has not been ported yet (I don't remember if chromium uses gtk+ 2 or what).
I guess that, excepts for video player (maybe another subsurfaces case), the porting effort from X to Wayland should't be so hard.
Comment
-
Originally posted by stqn View PostI?m curious about the amount of work needed to port an application to use Wayland. A team at Intel needed 2 months to partially port Chromium which already had an abstraction layer?
Also I never remember what problems Wayland is supposed to fix. I went to their web site to read some doc two days ago but nothing sticked in my mind.
For the end user, that means nothing new per se, but possibly more things or better quality things in general (in the future. right now, you'll have as much things, but buggier, until the technology gets fully mature).
For example, the wayland back-end for the R-Pi uses the GPU's hardware compositor, with an incredible boost in performance. That's something that cannot be done with X.
It is this kind of little things.
Comment
Comment