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

I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 892 posts

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#151

Post by lewispollard »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28

> In the case of Wayland, the “vague authority” are a bunch of volunteers who have devoted tens of thousands of hours of their free time towards making free shit for you. That does not mean anyone is under an obligation to like it. > Maybe Wayland doesn’t work for your precious use-case. More likely, it does work, and you swallowed some propaganda based on an assumption which might have been correct 7 years ago. If y…

> I've been down this road a lot with FOSS software: "I don't use it because it doesn't do what I need", "sure it does!", "no, it really doesn't", "well you don't need that anyway!"...

Just recently (I was on a Fedora box temporarily) I was trying to figure out how to get Nautilus to stop starting a search whenever I typed something, and instead highlight the nearest match in the current directory, y'know, like pretty much every other file manager in existence. Eventually I found a thread where the core Gnome contributors were saying "it sounds like you don't want this feature, what you really want is a better search function". They probably should never have enabled "reactions" on their bug tracker since it was piled 100's high with negative reactions - yet they still doubled down and said it's not something they're going to support (despite having supported it in the past, and Ubuntu even bundling patches to make it happen up until recently).

It's a frustrating trend in FOSS that contributors feel like "we're doing this for FREE don't you know, so whatever we say is lore and since you're not paying, we don't have to listen to you". Yes, I understand how amazing it is that this software is truly free and created by volunteers, no, I don't understand how that gives you dictatorial power over 100s of users who don't like the changes you've made.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#152

Post by [deleted] »

ilaksh wrote: post #112
varbhat wrote: post #94

I am neither fond of Xorg nor Wayland. I have used both and I see shortcomings of both. Xorg is Overly Bloated/Done without giving much importance to security. On the other hand, Wayland is technically superior , might be more secure than Xorg. But, it's feature parity doesn't match with that of Xorg. Now,i don't think those features must be pushed into Wayland itself. i don't know but something desktop oriented Wayl…

Is there a special privilege or group membership or root or anything required for that screen access API?

[deleted]

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#153

Post by turminal »

mdiesel wrote: post #17
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which of course means that it must be good enough for everyone, because it works for you.

No, but Wayland is not a bit of software you even think about until it goes wrong. That means the internet gets disproportionately filled with posts about Wayland not working, which presents the wrong image. When reading up on what desktop environment to use, it's hard to get a balanced view unless there are commenters like this, saying that running Wayland works.

> No, but Wayland is not a bit of software you even think about until it goes wrong. That means the internet gets disproportionately filled with posts about Wayland not working, which presents the wrong image.

Kind of like reverse survivorship bias. The only wayland sessions that get attention on the internet arw the ones that don't work.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#154

Post by nabla9 »

sixothree wrote: post #64
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28

> In the case of Wayland, the “vague authority” are a bunch of volunteers who have devoted tens of thousands of hours of their free time towards making free shit for you. That does not mean anyone is under an obligation to like it. > Maybe Wayland doesn’t work for your precious use-case. More likely, it does work, and you swallowed some propaganda based on an assumption which might have been correct 7 years ago. If y…

That amount of negativity on the internet is just astounding sometimes. Technology Connections has called for some positivity in twitter responses. He throws out random crazy suggestions on twitter, as he points out it was designed for. But there is always someone faulting it. Yesterday I made a casual observation about something quite obvious, and more importantly, completely irrelevant. And without fail, the only r…

In HN healthy ratio is something like 10% positive 90% negative, I think.

It would match the ratio between good software and self promoted junk.

----

I think Ubuntu is good gauge for the real state of Wayland. They would like to switch to Wayland as soon as possible but even in the 21.04 Ubuntu still defaults to Xorg on Nvidia based systems.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#155

Post by Lammy »

Why do people have to politicize everything to this degree? I guess I’m on this dude’s “enemies” list now because I don’t want to throw away the window manager I’ve used for literally two decades. I’m okay with that :)

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#157

Post by js2 »

richrichardsson wrote: post #120
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28

> In the case of Wayland, the “vague authority” are a bunch of volunteers who have devoted tens of thousands of hours of their free time towards making free shit for you. That does not mean anyone is under an obligation to like it. > Maybe Wayland doesn’t work for your precious use-case. More likely, it does work, and you swallowed some propaganda based on an assumption which might have been correct 7 years ago. If y…

> "well you don't need that anyway!" Something similar used to frustrate me no end when asking the Python community for help trying to solve a problem. Regularly someone would comment, "Why would you want to do that?". I wouldn't be asking if I didn't have a need to do it! It's bizarre that some people can't see beyond the end of their own nose and imagine different use cases to their own.

Often asking "why" is to tease out XY problems. It's not that the experts can't see past the end of their own nose, but rather that they have the experience to recognize questions that indicate the questioner has wandered off into the weeds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#158

Post by singron »

Aardwolf wrote: post #80
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #12

> So my new approach is “fuck you”. None of the Wayland detractors have a clue. Mmmmkay. That's a pretty broad statement, good luck with that attitude! > I’ve tried appealing to reason and rationally debunking each lie that some Wayland detractor flavor-of-the-week is touting to tow the party line, but it didn’t work. I guess he's referring to this post? https://drewdevault.com/2019/02/10/Wayland-misconceptions-de...

That post doesn't tackle the issue of being unable to do keyboard and mouse automation

Have you tried ydotool?

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#159

Post by zzz143 »

gspr wrote: post #146
zzz143 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Why do you care so much about what someone else decides to spend their time coding on? Man, people criticize the weirdest things sometimes. I for one greatly appreciate a lot of DeVault's work. Do I think he has the softest way of expressing his opinions? No. Do I need him to in order to appreciate the technical merits of his work? No. I'm not looking for a life partner – I'm looking for excellent software.

I didn’t say I cared. I said it was an undercapitalized endeavor partially due to infighting like this, and that sticking to it speaks for itself in terms of the goals and philosophy of a developer. I might have meant kudos for believing in something the world doesn’t and left it unspoken, for all you know, but your reaction to criticism of Drew DeVault tells me we are not discussing this on equal footing.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#160

Post by shadowgovt »

varbhat wrote: post #94

I am neither fond of Xorg nor Wayland. I have used both and I see shortcomings of both. Xorg is Overly Bloated/Done without giving much importance to security. On the other hand, Wayland is technically superior , might be more secure than Xorg. But, it's feature parity doesn't match with that of Xorg. Now,i don't think those features must be pushed into Wayland itself. i don't know but something desktop oriented Wayl…

Once upon a time, I had to write a system where the rendering architecture was broken up into an engine that ran in a separate service, and the pixels were then dumped to windows owned by client programs. Long story, it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Mac OS X had a very secure graphics architecture where no program could emit pixels into the window content of another program. As a result? We could barely support OSX. We ended up having to do rendering to pixel buffers and then using mmap through an invisible file shared between the service and client, then dumping the contents of the pixel buffer straight to screen using some code every client ran. Rendering from graphics card to RAM back to video buffer cost us half our frame rate.

On Windows? Client program passed its HWND to the service. Service bound an OpenGL target as a child of the client program's window.

Security is important, but in a graphics service, it creates a solid trade-off between what is possible and what is safe. That HWND trick can definitely be used to fake a login window and steal user passwords. But it also allows some programs to run on Windows that were technically impossible on Mac OSX without a complete rearchitecting.

(Clarification: I've gotten out of the game of writing Mac OSX software, but if I understand correctly that trick is possible under the modern architecture. It turns out Apple needed the ability for one program to write into another program's windows directly because they architected QuickTime as a service and performant video display required a similar trick to the one we were doing. So they added a mechanism for two processes to describe a shared rendering target to Quartz).

Post reply on HN