Debian 10 "Buster" Currently Defaults To GNOME On Wayland, But That Still Could Change

[Danielsan]

This remind me an harsh article from Italo Vignoli of LibreOffice against Apache Open Office, he stated that AOO was just a move from IBM to distract users from LOO and lead those to M$ Office.

Unfortunately the link is broken... http://www.italovignoli.com/files/st...officeeaoo.pdf (it was in Italian).

By the way now we are very OT...

[jacob]

Wayland solutions try to achieve the functionality of X solutions. Wayland solutions removes features.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745032

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...pboard-Manager

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GNOME-3.32.2-Released

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-3.96-Released

Let's pretend for a second that debianxfce is not a troll. X has been busy removing features too: remember PEX, MIT-SUNDRY-NONSTANDARD, XC-APPGROUP, XPrint and others? But the problem are things like the old X11 rendering engine, xfs, xrdb, XtIntrinsics, Athena and heaps more of old useless garbage that no one needed in the last 20 years, but that Xorg developers must still carry or it would cease being X. In the meantime, the same backwards compatibility not only prevents them from fully implementing those features that modern users actually want, like proper HiDPI support, tear-free video or secure screen locking, but it also means that a number of known bugs and security issues are forever unfixable.

[LightBit]

Technically when XFCE4 is completely ported to the GTK3 (and it is pretty close to achieve it) should be automagically Wayland ready... Isn't it?

No, because some things depend on X directly.

[LightBit]

IBM made RCU code that causes the Linux kernel to freeze with Ryzen.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196683

Is it IBM fault that CPUs are buggy?

[jacob]

The Xfce desktop has simple and proper HiDPI support, you can change the DPI to 192 and use a HiDPI theme.

No it doesn't. Proper HiDPI support means that apps can scale dynamically and automatically, move from one physical screen to another and adjust as needed, etc. XFCE nor any other X-based desktop doesn't do that and will never do that. "Use a HiDPI theme" reminds me of the time when people asked if they could use mouse model XYZ with Linux and the answer was "sure you can, just plug it in and recompile your kernel".

The Xfce desktop is light and fast so there is no tearing except moving windows fast. By enabling the compositor it is totally tear free

No it's not; there is no vsync for full screen video except (partially) if full screen itself was composited, which it isn't, and if it was, you would just swap one problem for a bunch of other problems (increased latency, priority inversions etc.).

but the compositor slows down performance in desktops.

So by the same token I presume that you use a single tasking OS like MS-DOS because preemption has a performance cost too, right?

Make your computing environment safe so no need for screen locking. I have never used them in my decades of computing.

Whataboutery. Sometimes you need to use a computer in public spaces. Sometimes it's company requirement (ISO certification and similar garbage). Sometimes you use a laptop that needs to lock when you suspend it. Etc. By design it can't be done on X11; searching for convoluted strawman reasons why it sometimes may not be strictly needed is no excuse.

[jacob]

Is it IBM fault that CPUs are buggy?

In our friend's universe yes, it's IBM's fault. But I'm sure that the bug would just go away if only they were running Debian and XFCE.

[Britoid]

No it doesn't. Proper HiDPI support means that apps can scale dynamically and automatically, move from one physical screen to another and adjust as needed, etc. XFCE nor any other X-based desktop doesn't do that and will never do that. "Use a HiDPI theme" reminds me of the time when people asked if they could use mouse model XYZ with Linux and the answer was "sure you can, just plug it in and recompile your kernel".



No it's not; there is no vsync for full screen video except (partially) if full screen itself was composited, which it isn't, and if it was, you would just swap one problem for a bunch of other problems (increased latency, priority inversions etc.).



So by the same token I presume that you use a single tasking OS like MS-DOS because preemption has a performance cost too, right?



Whataboutery. Sometimes you need to use a computer in public spaces. Sometimes it's company requirement (ISO certification and similar garbage). Sometimes you use a laptop that needs to lock when you suspend it. Etc. By design it can't be done on X11; searching for convoluted strawman reasons why it sometimes may not be strictly needed is no excuse.

Please stop using facts to argue with distro desktop, he's done this shit for the last 4 years and he's just kept around for laughs.

[Khrundel]

Most unfortunate thing about wayland is that nobody actually likes it. It was born out of frustration about X11 architecture, like lets reimplement GUI from scratch, but this is not enough to like it. They've started with a simple "here is your surface, draw anything on it, there are no native gui controls", but when this principle have started to threaten their fancy themed titlebars they've added server side decorations. When adaptive sync came to linux, wayland could get single useless, but real advantage over X from user side perspective: ability to have adaptive sync on a system with multiple monitors. How do you think, have anybody moved his finger to create protocol extension for vrr? No. Nobody cares.

[Ironmask]

Most unfortunate thing about wayland is that nobody actually likes it. It was born out of frustration about X11 architecture, like lets reimplement GUI from scratch, but this is not enough to like it. They've started with a simple "here is your surface, draw anything on it, there are no native gui controls", but when this principle have started to threaten their fancy themed titlebars they've added server side decorations. When adaptive sync came to linux, wayland could get single useless, but real advantage over X from user side perspective: ability to have adaptive sync on a system with multiple monitors. How do you think, have anybody moved his finger to create protocol extension for vrr? No. Nobody cares.

Wayland is an ever-evolving technology and adapting at an exceeding, unprecedented pace. I'm impatient too (much too impatient...), but immediately dismissing it feels like a fallacy to me. Linux itself used to be practically featureless and worthless, but after a little bit of development time it's one of the most powerful operating systems on earth. Wayland's development can, will and currently is enabling developers to create graphical solutions they could only dream about in Xorg.

Please stop using facts to argue with distro desktop, he's done this shit for the last 4 years and he's just kept around for laughs.

I find it more thrilling to break down his psychology or offer an irrefutable argument (e.g. "This is my opinion and that is your opinion", "All Wayland developers are Xorg developers", etc.). He stops responding after that.

[xfcedebian]

In our friend's universe yes, it's IBM's fault. But I'm sure that the bug would just go away if only they were running Debian and XFCE.

You say this in jest but you have little clue how correct you are. The holy presence of Debian and Xfce can deflect all evil introduced by IBM. IBM (Irrational Beastly Menace) has spies inside Intel corp introducing bugs that they can further control in software. The sane, rational devs of Debian and Xorg (not the evil traitors who moved to wayland) create their software to deactivate the evil bugs introduced by IBM. You also can't disagree with me about this, I'm not allowing you to. Also install Debian and Xfce. It's unrelated to this post but I just thought I'd throw out a demand for the sake of it.