Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

phoronix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 714 posts

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#471

Post by WesolyKubeczek »

horsawlarway wrote: post #462
bitwize wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: I call systems like this CADT-compliant after Jamie Zawinski's Cascade of Attention-Deficit Teenagers idea. Wayland is a system for which CADT-compliance (and maybe security) trumps nearly all other concerns. No surprise, the primary use case for Wayland is and was always GNOME -- the very system for which Zawinski coined CADT.

I mean... having used both X and Wayland as daily drivers, you're fucking insane if you think you can EVER get me back on X. On Wayland I get excellent multi-monitor support (mixed scaling ratios, much better automatic detection and configuration, much better plug-and-play). I also have a touchpad on my XPS that feels just as good as a Mac. To boot, I haven't had to touch a config file related to input devices or out…

Just curious, what was your browser again?

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#472

Post by horsawlarway »

arpa wrote: post #102
kriive wrote: post #57

I have been using sway on Fedora for a year. It's been really good so. It's a smaller niche than X.org's, but I get to do everything I need. HiDPI support is just right, just throw output eDP1-1 scale 2 in the config and you're set. Clipboard works perfectly splendid, screen-sharing works (not as perfectly splendid as clipboard does), input works, chromium/electron is getting support for native wayland. Qt and GTK Wa…

Just out of curiosity, how does screenshare work for you? I've been trying setting it up for work (slack/teams), but to this day it just doesn't work. Using debian sid, so pretty up-to date packages tbh. I just start new xorg session for screenshare, which, frankly, sucks.

Yup, this is sort of here with pipewire at this point, but it hasn't propagated through to the electron apps.

Slack is still a pain point for me as well, but mainly because Slack continues to demand that I install the desktop app for calls/screen sharing.

Zoom's desktop app also doesn't work, but I can use zoom-redirector and have the calls immediately open in my browser (you can get the same thing without the extension, but it requires you pretend that you can't install their desktop app and several button presses for every meeting).

My guess is that we're about 12 months away from having it work by default in most places.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#473

Post by [deleted] »

ywei3410 wrote: post #400
marcosdumay wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they optional¹ and are there alternatives to them? If the answer is yes, then there is a problem. 1 - I imagine "optional" can be the wrong word, maybe the correct is "universally adopted".

Maybe a more concrete example will answer your question. The Wayland protocols are found here [1]. Your compositor will implement some of these protocols and not others. If I’m writing an application I will; possibly through some toolkit, ask the compositor what features it supports and configure how my application works accordingly. This isn’t particularly different to say, an toolkit not supporting a particular for…

[deleted]

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#474

Post by moomin »

wegs wrote: post #430
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #422

What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of 2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto? Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, an…

Newer isn't better-designed. Unix was really well-designed, compared to so much of the modern stuff, and it does everything I need. Nineties Linux was a nice Unix. I wish we hadn't spent the past quarter-century turning it into nineties Windows, with layers upon layers upon layers of cruft. I don't get why Wayland is slow, when Enlightenment was fast on machines with 32MB of RAM, a 3dfx Voodoo, a spinning HDD, and a…

One of these days you should read the X section of the Unix Haters Handbook. Wayland is being built for the world as it is, X was built for a world that never was. In this case, it’s quite hard to not be better designed.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#475

Post by nsajko »

ximm wrote: post #164
nsajko wrote: post #132

If Wayland is the future, the future is grim. People often complain that Wayland is taking a long time to catch up to X11, but that actually stems from a deeper issue: Wayland has a horrible design, for an X11 replacement, a design that leads to massive fragmentation issues across the graphical part of the Linux ecosystem. Implementing a Wayland compositor requires much more effort than implementing an X11 window man…

Was the pun intended? https://github.com/emersion/grim

No, it's just awkward and unfortunate wording :)

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#476

Post by horsawlarway »

ravenstine wrote: post #180

If Wayland is the future, then the future was 12 years ago. Since it hasn't really caught on or solved the same problems that X.Org accomplished a long time ago, it seems kind of pointless to continue pursuing it at this point. In my opinion, the best thing about X.Org is that it's no longer changing. I remember installing updates for X.Org all the time and booting to a black screen on multiple occasions.

Ubuntu is shipping Wayland by default now.

I vastly prefer Wayland on every machine I've used both X and Wayland on (and on laptops, it's frankly hard to describe how much better it is).

Basically - Wayland isn't the future, Wayland is the NOW.

If you want a great touchpad experience on linux? - Wayland

If you want multi-touch and gesture support out of the box? - Wayland

If you want multi-monitor support and mixed scaling? - Wayland

If you don't want to have to edit multiple conf files on every new install? - Wayland

If you want your windows to resize and actually respect the scaling of the current display, instead of the one they opened on? - Wayland

Honestly, it does exactly what I want my display server to do, and then mostly gets out of the way.

My last real sticking point was screen sharing, and I can get that fine with Pipewire and chrome at this point.

I don't open sessions in x anymore.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#477

Post by transpostmeta »

Androider wrote: post #438
nsajko wrote: post #132

If Wayland is the future, the future is grim. People often complain that Wayland is taking a long time to catch up to X11, but that actually stems from a deeper issue: Wayland has a horrible design, for an X11 replacement, a design that leads to massive fragmentation issues across the graphical part of the Linux ecosystem. Implementing a Wayland compositor requires much more effort than implementing an X11 window man…

The problems Wayland solve are those of yesteryear, sprinkled with the broken dreams that we'd all be running it on Linux phones by now. In that context a strict security model makes sense. Trouble is, that security model makes no sense on today's desktop. In 2020, people aren't downloading and running native applications on desktops, not even (especially?) on Linux. The desktop is now solely a manager of browser win…

You must realise that many people use desktop applications for their work. The Office suite, the Adobe suite, AutoCAD, ArcGIS: whatever program is in use in the industry you are in.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#478

Post by nsajko »

cycloptic wrote: post #249
nsajko wrote: post #132

If Wayland is the future, the future is grim. People often complain that Wayland is taking a long time to catch up to X11, but that actually stems from a deeper issue: Wayland has a horrible design, for an X11 replacement, a design that leads to massive fragmentation issues across the graphical part of the Linux ecosystem. Implementing a Wayland compositor requires much more effort than implementing an X11 window man…

Check ydotool for an xdotool replacement: https://github.com/ReimuNotMoe/ydotool The lack of a common screenshot protocol isn't related to security. The desktops just haven't been able to agree on a common protocol (yet?)

You're missing the point, which is that all of this should have been a part of Wayland, because "the desktops" will never agree on a common protocol.

Also, you're wrong that this isn't related to security, I can't be bothered to dig up some quotes right now, but it is/was actually very common to explain the lack of a screenshot feature on Wayland with security, and even to dismiss the feature altogether as a security issue.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#479

Post by WesolyKubeczek »

moomin wrote: post #474
wegs wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newer isn't better-designed. Unix was really well-designed, compared to so much of the modern stuff, and it does everything I need. Nineties Linux was a nice Unix. I wish we hadn't spent the past quarter-century turning it into nineties Windows, with layers upon layers upon layers of cruft. I don't get why Wayland is slow, when Enlightenment was fast on machines with 32MB of RAM, a 3dfx Voodoo, a spinning HDD, and a…

One of these days you should read the X section of the Unix Haters Handbook. Wayland is being built for the world as it is, X was built for a world that never was. In this case, it’s quite hard to not be better designed.

And yet it suffices to have two GPU in your system (both driven by OSS drivers) that the option of running Wayland disappears from GDM on Fedoras up to 32 at least.

The laptop in question is from the late 2016.

So much for "the world that is". My machine must be very, very otherworldly.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#480

Post by horsawlarway »

roenxi wrote: post #64
ceronman wrote: post #22

I have been using Fedora with Wayland daily for over 7 months now and I it works pretty well. I see that there are a lot of complains about Wayland here on HN. About input, screenshots and other stuff. But I have not experienced any of that. Input works perfectly and I have no problem with screenshots or screencasts. Maybe it's that I have well supported hardware (Thinkpad X1C7) or is it something that I'm missing?

"Works for me" is a risky defence; if you are a slightly demanding Wayland user then it is fine, if you have unusually simple needs it isn't a useful contribution. It isn't anything to do with the hardware, it is the design assumption that isolating application's input and output should be mandatory. In hindsight; that was a design mistake. The correct design is probably something like isolation by default but option…

>In hindsight; that was a design mistake. The correct design is probably something like isolation by default but optional (ie, allowing sharing).

I'm not really convinced it was. Frankly, Wayland does a great job handling the tasks I want my display server to handle. I don't have to wade into config files every time I plug in a new HID, or a new monitor, and my touch pad is a joy to use.

I think how screen sharing works is actually very dependent on the system in question ( I want a different set of prompts on my desktop from my laptop from my server), and that leaving that complexity out of the display server was a rough, but correct, decision.

That said, I'm with you - I held off on Wayland for a long time because screen sharing and screen recording just weren't there. At least for me, Pipewire is now a working solution. I won't go back to X.

Post reply on HN