X.Org Could Use More Help Improving & Addressing Its Security

[pal666]

No it doesnt

did i tell you that you are imbecile? https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/Mutter/RemoteDesktop

I have multiple machines, some with nvidia and some without so not sure what you are implying here.

i was talking about your stockholm syndrome, not your machines. i too have some machines with novideo cards, but it doesn't make me produce stupid claims

[pal666]

Because I had to set up VNC for servers that I am managing and at the time it didn't completely work, I had issues with certain NVidia/AMD cards and also with KDE (see https://phabricator.kde.org/D6096).

so either your hands don't support remote desktop, or kde doesn't support remote desktop. wayland does support remote desktop as a matter of fact

[pal666]

Actually I know the difference and the point is that the design of Wayland created this differentiation when it didn't exist before.

moron, before it was the difference between kde and x11

Wayland's design forces each DE to re-implement the same functionality themselves and that is a problem that Wayland introduced.

just as x11's design forced each de to implement the same functionality themselves.

and also don't be surprised that Wayland is not the default for many Linux distro's

nobody cares about your fringe distro

[pal666]

they insist on everyone rolling their own

they never insisted on that. only people who know exactly zero about software development could think this way. they insisted on "it's not their job". everyone is free to develop library and share it with others who have similar requirements

[pal666]

Yes, but in practice you're only expected to use X.org full time, while the others are there just for supporting non-native applications under the given system.

no, your others are part of xorg project. it's like "in practice gnome users are expected to run mutter full time". xorg is one x11 implementation, there are many others unrelated to it. though it's dominant one(just like gnome btw)

[pal666]

You are correct but also misleading. While it is true that Wayland technically speaking is just a protocol like X11, unlike X11 there is a no standard reference implementation that is usable (i.e. Weston doesn't count) so every DE is forced to reimplement the protocols themselves.

moron, you are wrong on two accounts here:
1) xorg isn't reference implementation, it's "one of implementations". it became de facto one after it killed everyone else. for example gnome can become "the wayland" after rest dies.
2) xorg did implement its own window manager, but no de used it. all des were "forced" to reimplemented themselves huge amount of code above x libs. and xorg didn't implement its compositor at all, all des were "forced" to reimplement compoistor themselves.

This means if some software works for X11, it will likely work for every DE.

this is wishful thinking, i.e. bullshit
people, who work on wayland(xorg devs btw), are not as stupid as you and will not repeat every x11 mistake. if people, who write de, want some shared functionality, they are free to implement it in a library and share, they don't need wayland's handholding. your whining will not help them and will not make wayland devs do stupid things

[pal666]

I think that this doesn't reflect the reality. A lot of people use Xorg, because wayland.. doesn't give any advantage to justify the switch

lol. in non-alternative reality most people use browser and have no idea whether it runs on xorg or wayland

I think that an error of the Wayland developers did was to not provide an "equivalent" of X11

i think you are not qualified to judge wayland devs job

This way of working is implemented in the window manager which must have control of the title bar of all windows. Wayland, implemented as CSD, prevent that.

it doesn't prevent it for gnome. are you confusing kde bugs with wayland issues?

[pal666]

Providing the protocol that only handled a subset of features without a real implementation of it that can be integrated into currently DE's is what the biggest mistake was.

your biggest mistake is to discuss stuff in which you have zero understanding

[pal666]

I think the error wasn't not providing an equivalent of X11, but not providing all the pieces for it.

not providing pieces for implementing print server? why do you think such nonsense? wayland has to provide only important things and important for everyone - not every wayland compositor is a desktop, wayland runs on smartphones and other devices. desktops should provide desktop-specific parts(jointly if they wish)

[pal666]

I see two main disadvantages:
1) each framework draws a different window decoration; but this is only an aesthetic problem

but somehow you fail to see that each framework draws a different window interior? let your frameworks use common library with proper plugins to draw window decoration if you like your decorations to not match your interiors

The most complex part of my sentence was "raise on click on the title bar": how the compositor implements this if it doesn't know anything about the "title bar" due to CSD ?

why do you even think about it? is it your job to write wayland code? why you don't leave it to people who do it? csd doesn't mean "compositor doesn't know", it means "compositor doesn't draw".