Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SDL2 Reverts Its Wayland Preference - Goes Back To X11 Default

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

  • caligula
    replied
    Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post

    IDK about Zoom, but with the latest Discord stable you can launch it with Chromium's Ozone/Wayland flags and the electron version will pick them up and not only render Discord natively on Wayland without xwayland, but also utilize PipeWire properly for screen sharing.
    I don't know about you, but if the clients and other groups assume the use of one tech, you can't just switch to something else. I think Discord is great, but it's not that commonly used for transmitting webinars etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • aufkrawall
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
    Couldn't the GNOME team just use a shader as a workaround? Night light is nothing more than lowering the blue and green channels...
    Probably won't work with direct scanout, without Wayland protocol this is a genuine driver feature.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daktyl198
    replied
    Originally posted by caligula View Post
    Mostly works? Webcam yes, screen share no. I guess you don't need that.
    IDK about Zoom, but with the latest Discord stable you can launch it with Chromium's Ozone/Wayland flags and the electron version will pick them up and not only render Discord natively on Wayland without xwayland, but also utilize PipeWire properly for screen sharing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Myownfriend
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

    Couldn't the GNOME team just use a shader as a workaround? Night light is nothing more than lowering the blue and green channels...
    This is great question! This was actually mentioned in the issue. I'm just gonna repeat what that posts says over here for simplicity's sake. A shader could absolutely be used to get the same effect but it would requiring rendering the whole screen to an off-screen buffer then applying the shader and displaying that result which would have a non-trivial effect on performance. I'm pretty sure the reason it would have to be drawn to an off-screen buffer is because the intention is to just tint stuff for viewing purposes, it's not the type of thing you'd want to also apply to apply to the results of screen grabs, screen recordings, or a color picker so you'd need a non-tinted version for that and a tinted version for display.

    By using GAMMA_LUT, it just gives the display processor a CLUT that it can use to transform the image right before it gets sent out of the display connector.

    Also it should be noted that this isn't just an Gnome issue. My understanding is that it KDE implements their blue-light rejection feature in the same way. Since GAMMA_LUT is a kernel-level feature, I'm pretty sure that Nvidia support for it would allow them to scrap the XRANDR method of changing the screen LUT that they use under Xorg and just use GAMMA_LUT for both sessions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vermilion
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    Countless things (for a start X11 has a single server, for Wayland we now have what? two dozens?) prove that whatever developers have on their minds is as remote from being rational and sensical as possible. If requiring common sense and much needed common API is trolling, then something might be wrong with someone's grey matter.
    Weird how you got angry for calling your behavior trolling, moments after you called the developers' decisions asinine. All while believing you hold a monopoly on common sense.

    Sure there's a single X11 server, because that's the only implementation that stayed alive for 18 years among all the other efforts. The same could happen to Wayland where different implementations dwindle with time and everyone converges towards a single best effort. That's not an advantage of X11 nor a limitation of Wayland's design. There's no protocol in the world that mandates a single implementation that should be used by everyone. After all, protocols are made for interoperability. I fail to see how the Wayland communication protocol could force that.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    So please kindly never mention me again and never reply to my posts, OK?
    Sorry but, you're posting your opinion on a public forum for everyone to read and comment on. So please kindly ignore my replies if you find my opinion doesn't align with yours, or stop posting altogether.
    Last edited by Vermilion; 19 April 2022, 05:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Myownfriend
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post

    Countless things (for a start X11 has a single server, for Wayland we now have what? two dozens?)
    X11 now has a single server...sort of. If XWayland and XQuarts are part of the Xserver git but they are different from Xorg. Before Xorg was Xfree86 which is what Xorg forked from and before that there was a number of other implementations that you could even find on the Wikipedia like Cygwin/X, Exceed, MKS X/Server, Reflection X, X-Win32, Xming, WeirdX, Android X Server, etc.

    I'm not sure that Wayland has anywhere near two dozen compositors but maybe I'm mistaken.

    You should really watch Keith Packard's A Political History of X.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    ...prove that whatever developers have on their minds is as remote from being rational and sensical as possible.

    If requiring common sense and much needed common API is trolling, then something might be wrong with someone's grey matter.
    Again, you really don't have enough knowledge of this stuff to be any sort of authority on what's sensible about this stuff. You don't seem to have the same sentiment about the 50 or so X Window Managers that literally replace part of Xorg.

    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    So please kindly never mention me again and never reply to my posts, OK?
    I don't see why they should comply. You could also leave since you don't really wanna be here anyway and don't like this community.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    So please kindly never mention us again and never reply to our posts, OK?
    We would be grateful if you did that.

    I agree on many of your points, but your extremely toxic and aggressive attitude doesn't help.
    Last edited by tildearrow; 19 April 2022, 04:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by Myownfriend View Post
    The reason why Gnome night light doesn't work on Nvidia hardware in Wayland is because the driver doesn't support GAMMA_LUT
    Couldn't the GNOME team just use a shader as a workaround? Night light is nothing more than lowering the blue and green channels...

    Leave a comment:


  • birdie
    replied
    Originally posted by Vermilion View Post

    Was wondering how come the title mentioned Wayland yet you didn't link your issue sooner. Guess I needed more patience.

    Countless people discussed that content with you for the past months, and how most of it doesn't make sense from a Display protocol's perspective. At this point I'm convinced you're just being a troll and a spammer.
    Countless things (for a start X11 has a single server, for Wayland we now have what? two dozens?) prove that whatever developers have on their minds is as remote from being rational and sensical as possible. If requiring common sense and much needed common API is trolling, then something might be wrong with someone's grey matter.

    So please kindly never mention me again and never reply to my posts, OK?

    Leave a comment:


  • Myownfriend
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    Why does it matter if he codes? Design decisions that matter if you code are those internal to a project, not to an end user. If a design decision impacts end user then nobody gives a shit if he can code or not.
    He's making a judgement about the design decisions of a protocol. That's not end user territory. End users don't use protocols directly, programmers do. End users use it via the software that programmers make.

    He believes, for example, that Wayland should have protocols built into it that enable a client to access the buffers of other clients and the compositor even though Wayland clients already have ways of doing that. Clients can do both of those things and more with Pipewire and it's done in a way that work for both Wayland and X11 sessions.

    An end user would get the same result whether or not capture is done via Pipewire or via a Wayland or X11 extension, but birdie's pissed that it's not part of Wayland.

    He's also argued that a shared object isn't actually a shared object if only one thing decides to use it. Dude just doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    In fact that's probably the issue here, since Wayland developers (those who develop the protocol I mean) are a bunch of retards who thinks the world revolves around their computing needs and reject any sensible feature request that other users want out of their display server/protocol because they use it on X11.

    Claiming "it's not needed" makes them a bunch of lunatic fringe fucks.
    How come so many anti-wayland people can't help but expose themselves for being shitty people? You're using ableist slurs and I've seen others randomly rant about SJWs and the LGBT community... in a discussion about Wayland.

    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    Claiming "it's not needed" makes them a bunch of lunatic fringe fucks.
    And this is why I decided to mention the thing about a Wayland screen capture protocol, it's literally not needed. Don't see how that makes people a bunch of lunatic fringe fucks for not feeling the need to make something that isn't needed.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X