Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet • Hacker News Board

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#281

Post by krzyk » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:24 PM UTC

jchw wrote: post #19

> Wayland solves no issues I have This is a common sentiment, but it is kind of funny. Because software engineers working for companies will know the struggle of trying to justify reducing technical debt, improving security practices, etc. but fail to see why these things are useful to them personally when the tables turn. Wayland indeed “breaks a lot of shit” but it’s not an accident or done due to incompetence. Als…

Exactly this: Wayland solves no issues I have

(It is very similar to systemd, and the motto on page https://nosystemd.org/ that is what I think about systemd also: If this is the solution, I want my problem back.)

If one doesn't use multi-GPU setups or high DPI they don't need Wayland, yet (later they will either have no options (like with systemd) or will buy better screens).

For me e.g. I don't know if I have a problem that Wayland may solve - I have not issues with Xorg, I don't like using more than one screen (I forces me to move my head left-right, I prefer single large screen, with full sized window) and I don't have high-dpi screen (I think, at what DPI does it start? My laptop has full-hd with 14", so probably not).

But later when such high-dpi screens will be the norm it would be nice to use them.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#282

Post by vetinari » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:24 PM UTC

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #269

vetinari wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just make a new property, That's the easy part. > and make those DPI-aware clients set it! That's the difficult part. You are welcome to try, though! > You could even make a small utility program that sets it on _other clients_, e.g. "windows created by these binaries get the DPI-aware property set automatically because I know it". Yes, another hack to keep on piles on other hack. Why would anyone want nice, clean…

> Hardware encoding for WebRTC is in the works; that's something they would not be able to efficiently do under X11 at all. And this is a not true, as evidenced by the fact even software ported from Windows (OBS) does it.

I specifically qualified it with efficiently. As in, when the surface is in the GPU memory, the software doesn't have to read it over PCIe bus and then put it back into another buffer for the encoder; but that the encoder can do zero-copy encoding in the GPU memory.

Here, Firefox uses dma-buf. Unless X11 exposes a special extension for exposing dma-buf, your client won't be able to do that.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#283

Post by adrusi » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:25 PM UTC

ddevault wrote: post #244

Hitton wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was just example. Because of Wayland's security model of sandboxing applications, none such tool will work. Currently afaik only way to do something similar is using /dev/uinput as does for instance ydotool , but its capabilities are vastly inferior.

What makes you think uinput is less capable? Ultimately everything that uses input uses uinput, it's the source of truth.

For the same reason that it can make sense to say that python is more powerful than C, even though you can obviously do more things with C than with python. Xdotool lets you send keystrokes to a particular window, even if it's not in focus. You can do that with ydotool if you also do some sway IPC, but it's not as convenient, and no one has made a higher-level tool, possibly because it would be a nightmare to make it work with multiple different compositors.

Do you know if there's any standardization effort to support xdotool-like functionality over wayland with some kind of actual security model (using ydotool kind of subverts the security improvements wayland offers unless one does more due diligence than is pleasant to do for quick scripts)

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#284

Post by paulie_a » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:26 PM UTC

shock wrote: post #241

scaladev wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is downvoting this and why? Face it, Xorg is on life support. The only patches it still receives are Xwayland-related fixes.

I don't expect a stable application to receive many patches. How many patches do you think Xorg should receive nowadays and in what areas?

X isn't stable

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#285

Post by ragnese » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:27 PM UTC

elric wrote: post #43

jchw wrote: post #19

> Wayland solves no issues I have This is a common sentiment, but it is kind of funny. Because software engineers working for companies will know the struggle of trying to justify reducing technical debt, improving security practices, etc. but fail to see why these things are useful to them personally when the tables turn. Wayland indeed “breaks a lot of shit” but it’s not an accident or done due to incompetence. Als…

> [...] reducing technical debt, improving security practices, etc Reducing technical debt by rewriting everything from scratch (almost?) never works. It's the baby and the bathwater. It's the sort of thing that seems attractive to junior developers, but more seasoned folks know that the legacy system contains years of embedded knowledge and workarounds for "real world" issues. The new, conceptually beautiful system…

Everything you said is correct. But, there are surely cases where even though rewriting everything from scratch almost never works, the status quo doesn't work either.

I'm afraid that's where the Linux desktop is today. Linux as a platform actually sucks for running "untrusted" software. And "untrusted" doesn't just mean proprietary games. It also just means "can I please run the alpha version of this cool open source project without being afraid that it'll fuck up my whole home directory?"

Android does a hacky thing where each program is its own "user". But then, having multiple (human) users is confusing (I don't know how Android does this, actually).

I don't know if Wayland will succeed. In fact, I'm rather pessimistic about it. But I'm also pessimistic about desktop Linux "succeeding" (staying reasonably useful even to nerds) if Wayland doesn't.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#286

Post by deadbunny » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:29 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #145

canofbars wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its extremely slow and does not support CUDA. I think the problem is nvidia blocks them somehow from changing the clock speed on the gpu so it gets stuck running in its slowest speed.

That's a shame, I enjoy playing with ML so having no CUDA available is a bit of a showstopper there. For graphics I'd like to switch to AMD, but right now you just can't buy their higher end consumer cards.

To be fair you can't buy any 3000 series Nvidia card either.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#287

Post by adrusi » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:30 PM UTC

nly wrote: post #124

roenxi wrote: post #36

Wayland represents an interesting and possibly classic software situation - a beautiful standard has been developed. It blocks the user from using a screenshot application in the name of security. Now when the standard gets rolled out kludge will be developed to allow users to still take screenshots. The beauty of the standard will be compromised or everyone will spend a bunch of time pretending the kludge isn't de-f…

Taking your example of screenshots... I don't think there's an 'official'/defacto Wayland protocol for that. Under GNOME Shell you can use the org.gnome.Shell.Screenshot dbus API, but under KDE you presumably have to use something else. It is pretty grim.

Pretty grim, heh

Context: https://wayland.emersion.fr/grim/

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#288

Post by vidarh » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:30 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #247

vidarh wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

systemd adds a concrete and substantial set of features for me. I eagerly embraced systemd for that reason - there are things I don't like about it, but it gave me lots of new benefits that justified the effort. Moving to Wayland would force a bunch of changes on me for the sake of no functionality I care about. That's the big difference. Given it provides no benefits to me that I care about, I won't move until stayi…

But that's the thing though. For _you_ systemd had a concrete and substantial set of features, while wayland doesn't for many others it was the other way around. (I don't mind either, but there are annoyances in both). The problem is that many are complaining that _their_ specific set of functionalities is no longer being catered for, or better not being actively developed. The great thing about linux is that you can…

The point is not that nobody sees benefits in Wayland, but that the case for switching is a lot more ambiguous. There's a substantial proportion of people for whom it is a loss of functionality or effort for no benefits. With systemd there was no loss of functionality - it is compatible enough that if you don't make use of the new functionality you don't lose anything. With Wayland, if you depend on any number of different functionality aspects, you either lose functionality or have to pick specific compositors that implement additional protocols.

With respect to my time investment, it's down to having to switch window manager. I'm using bspwm, and rely extensively on the API it provides. I could probably transition that to sway if I had to. But I have no incentive to. It gives me no new functionality and solves no problems I'm having.

So I'll stay on Xorg until an incentive appears to justify the fairly significant time cost of reworking my workflows and/or a bspwm compatible compositor arrives (there's been an issue open for 5 years, and at least one - abandoned - attempt).

The time investment required to switch also means I'd be prepared to invest quite a lot in getting Xorg running if the situation is the same down the line at a point where I can't get an "off the shelf" dpkg of Xorg.

At the pace Wayland efforts are moving, I suspect I'll still be on Xorg in 5 years, and wouldn't be surprised if I still was on it in 10.

But really, the main point of my earlier comment was that there are real, concrete reasons for people not to move to Wayland that has nothing to do with belief. It would take time I don't have to make the move, and it doesn't provide me any benefits to justify putting aside other things to invest that time. Maybe one day it will, but it won't be any time soon.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#289

Post by Aardwolf » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:32 PM UTC

jchw wrote: post #19

> Wayland solves no issues I have This is a common sentiment, but it is kind of funny. Because software engineers working for companies will know the struggle of trying to justify reducing technical debt, improving security practices, etc. but fail to see why these things are useful to them personally when the tables turn. Wayland indeed “breaks a lot of shit” but it’s not an accident or done due to incompetence. Als…

> The legacy is holding back desktop Linux quite a lot.

But I'd rather have it be replaced by something that's like X but supports higher resolution then (4K works for me with X though, no issues), rather than with something that doesn't allow screenshots, xdotool automation, clipboard, ... in the name of "security".

Wayland seems like a move to take away control from the user to me.

Re: Wayland is not ready as a 1:1 compatible Xorg replacement just yet

#290

Post by swiley » Tue, Feb 02, 2021, 1:32 PM UTC

zbuf wrote: post #202

Nobody has said it, but it seems we are reaching a fork in the desktop? For users, not 'right' and 'wrong' here, just two groups whose goals differ. Those supporting X.org are using X very much in the spirit of it; custom window managers, network transparency, and possibly bitmapped fonts, BSDs. And those in support of Wayland have arrived there via Linux with eg. GNOME and dominated by GTK and QT desktop apps; looki…

One more nice thing about X that people sometimes miss is that you can turn off compositing (this is the default really.) Lots of people say Wayland feels "sluggish" and this is likely a major contributor to that. Especially if you don't have hardware acceleration (and there are a huge number of reasons why that might not be working.)

Wayland solves a lot of problems by deciding to just not handle things but we have to recognize that taking that position sacrifices things.