Mozilla Firefox 116 Now Available - Capable Of Wayland-Only Builds

[Myownfriend]

wayland_fan_bingo.jpg
oiaohm Awesome, I won the Wayland fan bingo!

You're supposed to mark stuff off in Bingo. Do you not know how Bingo works either?

The Boycott Wayland crew continues to bring down the average IQ in the room.

[Monsterovich]

Nobody said it's an evolution of X11. It's it's successor.

You said X12 is X11's successor yet you chose not to respond to my post showing how X12 would have been similar to Wayland? Why is that? Are you a coward?

It doesn't seem like Wayland can be considered a "success".

[Monsterovich]

You're supposed to mark stuff off in Bingo. Do you not know how Bingo works either?

And it works because this dude is a living pro-Wayland starter-pack.

[luno]

That should make it easier to discard the X11 code in the coming years so they won't have to put any more development effort into it.

it is already happening with Fedora KDE https://conf.kde.org/event/5/contributions/127/attachments/83/99/Entering%20a%20Wayland-only%20World%20with%20Plasma%206.0%20on%20Fedora%2 0(Akademy%202023).pdf , new GUI framework are deciding whether to support Xorg or not https://github.com/linebender/glazie...sue-1766582374 , so expect WONTFIX in Xorg issues in Wayland only world from lot of projects. maintaining and testing two paths is time-consuming and we are not going back to X so it better to move to Wayland and report your issues , Linux is getting a lot of exposure nowdays, so we can expect something better than Wayland in some decades

[schmidtbag]

That reminds me, is Mozilla doing Linux ARM builds of Firefox yet? They've been doing Windows ARM builds for quite a while now, but no Linux option available at least when my PinePhone was still functional. I wanted to run Firefox in flatpaks, and I still want to when I get anther PinePhone.

There have been ARM builds for many years now. From your repos though, not sure about Flatpaks.

[Myownfriend]

The point of X12 is to update the protocol and make it fully backward compatible with X11 (via layers for compatibility). In general, it will be the same graphical server with all the libraries, just another reworked version of the protocol where the limitations are removed. Right now it doesn't make sense yet because X11 is still relevant.

Where are you getting that? Lol

What layers of compatibility? How are they being implemented in the protocol itself? How is a graphical server supposed to be the same but also have all the limitations removed? When you say "server", are you talking about Xorg?

Why would it not make sense to do X12 yet when X11 can't even properly do multi-monitor? That's a pretty basic thing at this point.

X11 doesn't need to be replaced yet is on my X11 loyalist Bingo card.

Wayland is just a spec that has no libraries

Libwayland. You know about this already. It's been mentioned several times in the Boycott Wayland thread.


[QUOTE=Monsterovich;n1401259]or server, so each DE is a separate incompatible graphical server which should implement even basic desktop features from scratch.[QUOTE]

Everything HAS to rebuild everything from scratch is on my X11 loyalist Bingo card.

XFCE can just run on Mutter.

Also have you ever done any development of a DE? I'm just curious lol

The rest of the features that don't fit into Wayland's crappy architecture are done through crutches like Pipewire + D-Bus (mandatory!).

Pipewire is a crutch/workaround is on my X11 loyalist Bingo card.

What makes Wayland's architecture crappy? How are Pipewire and D-Bus crutches?

You sure can repeat others in your echo chamber well but can you explain why you think what you think?

I'll repeat myself yet again for you. Pipewire and D-Bus work for both X11 and Wayland. From the perspective of an application developer who wants to implement something like screen capture, using Pipewire means they don't have to implement it two different ways to support X11 and Wayland.

Why should it be implemented in the display server/compositing protocol when it doesn't need to be and doing so would make supporting both protocols harder from the applications perspective?

The fragmentation also exists for all other desktop features: color management, shortcuts, window management, etc.

Mentions of fragmentation and linking to Birdies issue as if it says anything useful are both on my X11 loyalist Bingo card.

There is no fragmentation for color management nor does that post claim there is. The color management protocol is still being worked on so no compositors have implemented it yet. That's not fragmentation.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. How can this all be considered X12 and a successor to Xorg?

Do you know what a successor is?

[Myownfriend]

It doesn't seem like Wayland can be considered a "success".

It's the default on some of the largest Linux distro and the largest DEs. Support for it is implemented in the largest application toolkits. Every major web browser supports it. Support for it is currently being added to Wine.

How is it not a success? More effort in your posts please.

[mrg666]

BTW, people, there will be a Wayland-only Mozilla 116 build.

[oiaohm]

The point of X12 is to update the protocol and make it fully backward compatible with X11 (via layers for compatibility). In general, it will be the same graphical server with all the libraries, just another reworked version of the protocol where the limitations are removed. Right now it doesn't make sense yet because X11 is still relevant.

Not true about X12. You need to read the https://www.x.org/wiki/Development/X12/ no where does it say it will be fully backwards compatible and this is critical. X1 to X9 were experimental protocols and none of them were compatible with each other. X10 looks a lot like X11 except there is one very big catch X11 is not backwards compatible with X10 at all. Yes to run X10 applications on X11 server requires X10 server designed to run on top of X11 that does exist.

X[N] every time the N changes its a protocol breaking change. Looking at changing the major version number is planning to make backwards compatible breakage change. Yes if X12 is ever implemented as X12 in x.org X server you will need Xwayland equal to support old X11 applications.

You need to go over that bingo board carefully lot of things there are not Wayland unique.

Wayland is just a spec that has no libraries or server, so each DE is a separate incompatible graphical server which should implement even basic desktop features from scratch.

There is a large amount of false in this. Wayland project provides libraries the "libwayland" bit particularly libwayland-server that almost 100 percent of all Wayland compositors use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_display_servers#Wayland

Yes nice table. There is only rust based compositors out there that don't use libwayland-server. So wayland like it or not does have libraries and they are used massively. Yes it also rare to find an application client application for wayland that does not use libwayland-client.

Remember X11 protocol does not forbid people from implementing there own X11 server and people use to do that.

The rest of the features that don't fit into Wayland's crappy architecture are done through crutches like Pipewire + D-Bus (mandatory!).

System tray was moved to dbus by X11 DE before wayland started. D-Bus full name is "Desktop Bus" in fact wayland first developers considered using D-Bus instead of developing their own wayland protocol. Overhead d-bus back then made that idea rejected. Remember this was before d-bus broker and other performance increasing optimizations. Maybe you would be happier if instead of Wayland protocol they had gone fully in with D-Bus only?

The fragmentation also exists for all other desktop features: color management, shortcuts, window management.

Wayland project has a reference server being weston and it supports shell libraries now so here is mega catch here the title of that bug report you have pointed to has in fact been implemented in weston so it valid closed. Just other parties implementing wayland compositors have wanted to keep on doing their own thing same way X11 independent implementations use todo. History repeats in a lot of ways it took a few decades for X11 server developing groups to decide mostly come unified around Xfree86 and x.org. Yes the fragmentation of wayland compositors is the classic history repeats problem. People forget X11 server implementations for decades was a nice fragmented mess as well..

Lets list of 3 you have there.
1)color management under X11 in usable form this has required colord this requires d-bus and this starts before Wayland exists.
2) shortcuts all forms of central management of shortcuts that existed before Wayland also depend on d-bus and it predecessors yes KDE in the next KDE release will be removing one of the predecessors here.
Windows management first one out of the 3 you listed that did not require d-bus to be usable under X11.
Yes go though that bug report carefully and you will find usable X11 desktop end up need lots of d-bus usage because X11 protocol is not suitable for lots of things.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. How can this all be considered X12 and a successor to Xorg?

The limited usable scope problem and needing d-bus to get things done of Wayland comes directly from how people were doing things under X11.

Wayland falling back on D-bus where it suites is one of the horrible signs that its X12/x11 related. People miss how much is done by d-bus on X11 desktops because the X11 protocol is not suitable for the task. Yes wayland developers saying use d-bus when wayland protocol is not suitable is really the same thing the X11 developer use to say leading to D-Bus coming into existence in the first place. Lot of ways Wayland development is massive infected with X11 developers ways of doing things.

[mrg666]

Why argue in favor or against a dead project (?), especially since by now it's clear that Wayland is the only way forward.

Exactly! Train left the station, some are yelling after that to call back. But Wayland does not have to be way forward, if one of these opinionated geniuses would develop something revolutionary and demonstrate it. All I see is they are wasting their time on the forums though.