Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chromium Browser Is Running Great On Wayland

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

  • Sonadow
    replied
    According to Intel, the Wayland-capable version of Chromium is still a downstream project with heavy patching needed :https://github.com/01org/ozone-wayland#gardening

    Any news or information on when these patches will be committed upstream as part of the vanilla Chromium sources?

    Leave a comment:


  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by newwen View Post
    I've noticed that too. In ubuntu (X.org) it is using window borders, but under wayland they're using client side decorations with no borders, which looks much better in my opinion.
    I don't know if it's better or worse, but what intrigues me is if it's intentional or not. If it's not, it should be filed as a bug.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daktyl198
    replied
    Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
    I wonder if the GTK3 version of Firefox runs on Wayland.
    Not right away, since I think it makes quite a bit of X.org calls, but once the GTK3 port is done (and the largest problem was recently resolved, so it shouldn't be long now) then they can get on removing those calls or abstracting them.

    Leave a comment:


  • blackout23
    replied
    I wonder if the GTK3 version of Firefox runs on Wayland.

    Leave a comment:


  • rudregues
    replied
    Originally posted by mannerov View Post
    I've tried to build chromium for wayland with their instructions, but ... I stopped after it had downloaded 9GB of dependencies, and it wasn't stopping.
    I don't want to replace many of these libraries which are already on my system.
    Which chromium version I must compile to add ozone support?

    Obs.: the strange 9GB dependencies can be due to develpment options (like the test compile flag). Just supposing.

    Leave a comment:


  • mannerov
    replied
    I've tried to build chromium for wayland with their instructions, but ... I stopped after it had downloaded 9GB of dependencies, and it wasn't stopping.
    I don't want to replace many of these libraries which are already on my system.

    uid313: you're obviously trolling, but let's give an answer:
    What's your measure of performance?
    If it's games fps, then performance should be exactly the same than X Dri3+Present in GPU limited scenarios.

    But we can hope having better cpu comsumption / idle time with wayland, and then better battery life.
    And when everything is designed and implemented for several DE, we'll be able to verify that.

    We can also hope better user experience with some things beeing better designed, but since everything isn't yet designed, we have yet to see.

    Leave a comment:


  • kaprikawn
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    But Wayland have less performance than X.org Server, right?
    X.org has been around since the late 70s, it's fairly mature software. Wayland is up-and-coming. Stop trolling idiot.

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    Performance

    But Wayland have less performance than X.org Server, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • dalingrin
    replied
    Originally posted by sarmad View Post
    Why would they need Wayland for per-pixel scrolling? Firefox seems to be doing it on xorg.
    AFAIK firefox does not do per-pixel scrolling in Linux. Firefox only gets scroll wheel events which by default scrolls 3 lines per increment. Firefox does use an animation to smooth the transition of 3 lines but its not nearly as nice as per-pixel scrolling. Wayland is not required for per-pixel scrolling but the older toolkits like GTK2 do not support it. I'm hoping the clean slate of Wayland + Aura would get per pixel scrolling in Chromium.

    Leave a comment:


  • sarmad
    replied
    Originally posted by dalingrin View Post
    I hope this will finally allow for per pixel scrolling like Windows and Mac.
    Why would they need Wayland for per-pixel scrolling? Firefox seems to be doing it on xorg.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X