Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Xfce 4.20 Aiming For Usable Wayland Support While Maintaining X11 Compatibility

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

  • #31
    People who complain that there’s multiple Wayland compositors seem to forget that Xorg had multiple compositors and window managers, and in some cases they weren’t swappable (e.g gnome)

    All that’s happened is that the man in the middle (Xorg) has been removed and come up with a proper protocol to talk to the compositors directly.

    increasing performance, reducing battery usage, and mapping more to how modern graphics hardware is made.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by muncrief View Post

      I think working for a better future, whether it be for humankind or technology, is a fantastic and desirable thing ridge.

      It's pretending that it's already here that's the problem.

      Wayland simply isn't ready to take over for X11. I hope one day it will be, but the nature of its design, and plethora of implementations, makes that highly improbable.

      The most likely outcome is that over the next few decades some implementation of Wayland will become the standard, and only applications with active developers and the resources necessary to rewrite their applications for it, will remain.

      The simple fact is that Wayland is defective by design, as it requires applications to be modified for it, and its enthusiasts jumped the gun.

      But as I often say, the beauty of Linux is that there are so many choices. And whether users choose Wayland or X11, I say more power to them. I just want everyone to live in, and consider, the reality of the world around us.
      Then any replacement for X is defective by design. Any updated display protocol would require toolkits and application updates because unlike windows and mac, where you talk to the display server via a system library that can be updated, on Linux everything is talking to the display server direct.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Britoid View Post

        Then any replacement for X is defective by design. Any updated display protocol would require toolkits and application updates because unlike windows and mac, where you talk to the display server via a system library that can be updated, on Linux everything is talking to the display server direct.
        Actually a new design could have been implemented with backwards compatibility in mind, so that something like XWayland would have been able to fully support X11 applications.

        But it wasn't, so we're stuck with Wayland and its incomplete support of legacy X11 applications.

        However there's no point in lamenting over what could have been, we must simply deal with what is as best as we can.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by muncrief View Post

          Actually a new design could have been implemented with backwards compatibility in mind, so that something like XWayland would have been able to fully support X11 applications.

          But it wasn't, so we're stuck with Wayland and its incomplete support of legacy X11 applications.

          However there's no point in lamenting over what could have been, we must simply deal with what is as best as we can.
          And as always, the issue is never backwards compatibility with displaying things. That works just fine and always has with xwayland. The issue is that the X.org server did way more things than just being a display server, which was part of it's issue. The way we did so many things on the desktop were just hacks on top of features that the X.org server shouldn't have had in the first place as a display server, or hacks on top of how freely the X.org server gave any application any and all of it's data (again, some of which it shouldn't have even had).

          The fact that something as simple as copying and pasting is not transferable when going from one display protocol to another should tell you exactly how fucked the previous setup was. Issues with screensharing or screenshots makes sense, as it intersects with the display in some way. But the fact that we had to write an entirely different input system when changing display protocols should not have happened in the first place.

          Now that all of the work has been done to properly separate things that should be separated, we can change display protocols in the future with little to no issue if necessary at all (which it shouldn't be, unless GPUs drastically change their architecture in the near future).

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Britoid View Post
            People who complain that there’s multiple Wayland compositors seem to forget that Xorg had multiple compositors and window managers, and in some cases they weren’t swappable (e.g gnome)

            All that’s happened is that the man in the middle (Xorg) has been removed and come up with a proper protocol to talk to the compositors directly.

            increasing performance, reducing battery usage, and mapping more to how modern graphics hardware is made.
            First of all, Xorg didn't require compositing and many window managers for it did not offer/support it. It was optional.

            Secondly, Wayland mandates compositing which means a single Wayland implementation could have become what Xorg was missing and required to implement.

            Thirdly, without compositing, implementing an Xorg window manager was a breeze.

            On the other hand a full featured Wayland implementation requires hundreds of thousands of lines of code each individual Wayland compositor has to implement while Xorg offered the most required basics out of the box.

            People continue to quote now three Wayland libraries libweston, wl-roots and louvre. Even here we lack standardization, and both Mutter and KWin don't use any of them.

            It's a freaking mess but Wayland proponents don't care about any of that. Meanwhile WDDM runs circles around both Xorg and multiple Wayland implementations and trumps both by a factor of 20, so what they are fans of I've no idea.

            Comment


            • #36
              And then we have this gem:

              Originally posted by mxan View Post
              All the features that keep sitting around unmerged for years in GNOME makes me glad I use KDE more.

              KDE already has VRR (left unmerged in GNOME for 3 years) and already has real fractional scaling (for GNOME it won't happen until GTK 5). Plasma 6 adds compositor hand-offs so KWin crashing won't take down your whole session (GTK devs think compositor hand-offs are "absolutely stupid"), it adds a nice overview / exposé mode that works just like GNOME's, it's soon to get triple buffering (also unmerged in GNOME for 3 years), soon to get session restore, soon to get HDR (KDE devs are at the forefront of developing HDR and colour management support on Wayland), has better core apps, and is customisable out of the box without needing 5000 flimsy extensions that break every update. Why do people still bother with GNOME? It's a stangant project at this point.
              To have a decent Wayland experience you have to choose your DE wisely. LOL. I mean it's either KDE or GTFO. Not even Gnome is supporting Wayland properly.

              The situation around Wayland couldn't get even worse than that 15 years after its inception.

              All good, all fine, please disperse.

              And I'm a troll for wanting the same fucking experience for all Linux users regardless of the Wayland compositor they've chosen. What people here are throwing at me is an insult to intelligence.

              In this topic we're witnessing how XFCE is struggling to support Wayland, however Wayland fans claim it's all according to the plan. FML!

              And Wayfire which is now several times more complex than IceWM offers fewer features than IceWM has. If that's not damning evidence of Wayland's failure I don't know what is.
              Last edited by avis; 10 February 2024, 03:40 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post

                And as always, the issue is never backwards compatibility with displaying things. That works just fine and always has with xwayland. The issue is that the X.org server did way more things than just being a display server, which was part of it's issue. The way we did so many things on the desktop were just hacks on top of features that the X.org server shouldn't have had in the first place as a display server, or hacks on top of how freely the X.org server gave any application any and all of it's data (again, some of which it shouldn't have even had).

                The fact that something as simple as copying and pasting is not transferable when going from one display protocol to another should tell you exactly how fucked the previous setup was. Issues with screensharing or screenshots makes sense, as it intersects with the display in some way. But the fact that we had to write an entirely different input system when changing display protocols should not have happened in the first place.

                Now that all of the work has been done to properly separate things that should be separated, we can change display protocols in the future with little to no issue if necessary at all (which it shouldn't be, unless GPUs drastically change their architecture in the near future).
                What X11 should've been is not the issue Daktyl198.

                The issue is what X11 is.

                And if the developers of Wayland had considered what's required to fully support legacy X11 applications it could have been designed to support it, most likely with separate optional modules that could be disabled or discarded if not used.

                But instead it was decided that a large portion of existing Linux applications would have to be abandoned if they couldn't be rewritten.

                And it was a terrible decision, and the primary reason there's so much blowback against Wayland.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Britoid View Post
                  People who complain that there’s multiple Wayland compositors seem to forget that Xorg had multiple compositors and window managers
                  And you forget that neither of them was actually required to use X11. And while WMs are useful, the compositors are only for some fancy effects.

                  and in some cases they weren’t swappable (e.g gnome)
                  GNOME is incompatible with the rest of the ecosystem by their own bizzare choices.

                  All that’s happened is that the man in the middle (Xorg) has been removed and come up with a proper protocol to talk to the compositors directly.

                  increasing performance, reducing battery usage, and mapping more to how modern graphics hardware is made.
                  Now without the middle man you simply recreate over and over again the same for each and every compositor hoping for better performance and security? Who's going to audit them all?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                    And as always, the issue is never backwards compatibility with displaying things. That works just fine and always has with xwayland. The issue is that the X.org server did way more things than just being a display server, which was part of it's issue. The way we did so many things on the desktop were just hacks on top of features that the X.org server shouldn't have had in the first place as a display server, or hacks on top of how freely the X.org server gave any application any and all of it's data (again, some of which it shouldn't have even had).

                    The fact that something as simple as copying and pasting is not transferable when going from one display protocol to another should tell you exactly how fucked the previous setup was. Issues with screensharing or screenshots makes sense, as it intersects with the display in some way. But the fact that we had to write an entirely different input system when changing display protocols should not have happened in the first place.

                    Now that all of the work has been done to properly separate things that should be separated, we can change display protocols in the future with little to no issue if necessary at all (which it shouldn't be, unless GPUs drastically change their architecture in the near future).
                    It's not a display server only, it's an entire windowing system. As it should be. And input needs to be tied to windows to dispatch it properly. It's the most efficient way to do it on the windowing server.

                    Separating the windowing system into display server is the issue here not the other way around. More complexity, more bugs (especially if you use less known stuff), more input lag, etc.

                    On Windows, this is the job of the kernel for the most part. It does have a separate compositor, but so does X11: the compositor you're running is not X11 itself (not X the app), it's a separate process that uses its interface.

                    Wayland is designed horrible in contrast. At the time, X11 also had proper design for slow graphics operations on the client, which is why you can send the server commands to draw geometry and so on instead of rasterized images only. It's not useful nowadays but that doesn't mean it was designed wrong.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by andyprough View Post
                      I've tried to spend as much time as possible in Gnome Wayland
                      with a lot of problems...

                      On Mesa dev sources there was a list of missing features and matrix of fulfilled promises and also unsolved things to do with level of completion. Missing that for DE environments and important things like you wrote in your quote. Such matrix.md from repo lived even on own web page to let common folks to regular check if is something new when Phoronix articles are missing when such Mesa next release is still in fluid :-)

                      But such own matrix feature page is maybe not also mesa based... and Wayland (not compositors, but don't bother if sway or such extraordinaries are also in palce) :-)

                      And if some ads are in place, who bother :| but I think this is linux folks Desktop job to fulfil but think that GNOME has been improved that there are no extensions in default only Ubuntu with brain has some installed but who knows if minimal install have them :|

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X