Originally posted by s_j_newbury
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Google Chrome 50 Released With Wayland Support
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by carewolf View PostWorks for me, and all existing Linux users.
Wayland does not, even after 10 years of development. It is better on paper and fixes many things that are not very nice in X, but since X is NOT broken, no one has been forced to upgrade and Wayland provides very little, since it is only slightly better on the technical side, but is missing features (which means broken in real life).
With regard to X, I guess it depends on what your definition of broken is. I consider X broken due to the overhead it brings to do modern compositing, tearing, security issues and general headaches that using X can entail.
Feature parity is an interesting topic as well because Wayland is a protocol and X is a server. The Wayland protocol is pretty solid for doing the general daily tasks on a computer. Yes, it still needs a few things, but it is in good shape. The problem becomes that the individual programs and desktop environments have to adapt their software to use the Wayland protocol which means tossing out a bunch of X stuff and redoing it to work in the Wayland world. It's not that those things can't be implemented, just that they haven't.
I'm greatly looking forward to living in an all Wayland world (desktop environment, browser typical desktop programs) for the smooth, tear free secure experience that it brings. I can't wait to try out Fedora 24 when it comes out to see how far Wayland has come from F23 that I'm running. I'll probably also try Gnome 3.20 on Antergos when it hits to play around with it.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by asdfblah View PostMesa (? I don't know much about the graphics stack...) + radeon supports both VDPAU and VAAPI. I suppose it doesn't really depend on X there, does it?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Remote User View Post
Could you be specific and tell us what it is that you yourself are trying to do in X which you cannot do because X is broken and won't do what you're trying to do with it?
Zero-copy compositing, input transformation, multi-surface windows, flexible refresh rates, secure screen locking(even when a context menu is open), input isolation, sane accelerated graphics bringup, reasonably-performing remote desktop. Heck, mere maintenance of the X server and client libraries is an intense chore.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by carewolf View PostWorks for me, and all existing Linux users.
Wayland does not, even after 10 years of development. It is better on paper and fixes many things that are not very nice in X, but since X is NOT broken, no one has been forced to upgrade and Wayland provides very little, since it is only slightly better on the technical side, but is missing features (which means broken in real life).
Wayland has not been in development for 10 years. The first commit is from 2008, and the first basic release was done in 2012.Last edited by microcode; 14 April 2016, 10:29 AM.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by microcode View Post
Zero-copy compositing, input transformation, multi-surface windows, flexible refresh rates, secure screen locking(even when a context menu is open), input isolation, sane accelerated graphics bringup, reasonably-performing remote desktop. Heck, mere maintenance of the X server and client libraries is an intense chore.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Duve View Post
There is likely more to that list, 30+ years of code that can't deviate from protocol.... That is some Ugly code to maintain.
* Different monitors can't have different scaling (you have a new 4K monitor, and an old 1080p monitor)
* The entire extension protocol isn't versioned, so it's a complete diceroll if different parts of an application support different versions of a given extension. The canonical example was Flash only supported certain versions of Input, but Firefox supported a higher one... which version did you get? No one knows.
All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
- Likes 4
Comment
Comment