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

221–230 of 892 posts

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

#221

Post by samsari »

londons_explore wrote: post #174
DCKing wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but there's no such thing as "switching to Wayland". What most people mean when they "switch to Wayland" is that they're switching from Gnome on X11 to a "pure Gnome" stack that uses Wayland and a bunch of other Freedesktop standards for interopability. There is absolutely no code from the "Wayland project" running there, because the Wayland implementation is Gnome's own (it's…

I completely agree. But as a user the distinction doesn't matter.

The distinction really really does matter, if your argument is "wayland is shit".

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

#222

Post by ahendriksen »

dleslie wrote: post #105
creata wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's not too much trouble, can you list the software you use which doesn't work on Wayland?

Emacs

Emacs works perfectly fine under xwayland. The recent pgtk feature branch does not use X anymore under wayland. What is not working for you?

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

#223

Post by corty »

DCKing wrote: post #163
londons_explore wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every 6 months I try switching to Wayland. I spend an hour or so using it for regular desktop gnome use and fixing minor bugs (ie. The kind I can fix with a config tweak). I then switch back again because it just isn't there yet. Recent issues: * The brightness control for my screen doesn't work with it. * The mouse sometimes lags * Graphical corruption in Chromium when on webgl sites. * Blank screen after resume fro…

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but there's no such thing as "switching to Wayland". What most people mean when they "switch to Wayland" is that they're switching from Gnome on X11 to a "pure Gnome" stack that uses Wayland and a bunch of other Freedesktop standards for interopability. There is absolutely no code from the "Wayland project" running there, because the Wayland implementation is Gnome's own (it's…

It is actually one of the big, unfixable, conceptual problems of Wayland that all the effort is duplicated in each compositor. The Wayland concept pushes out most of the work to the DEs. That of course will result in tons of predictable inconsistency, incompatibility, bugs, delays, consolidations and general pain. Wayland devs are then generally in the lazy "worksforme, use sway (or whatever)" position while the user (of some other compositor) will be out there complaining to yet another maintainer duplicating yet another feature badly. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Wayland is bad design, and it shows in the users' and maintainers' attrition.

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

#224

Post by shadowgovt »

londons_explore wrote: post #174
DCKing wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but there's no such thing as "switching to Wayland". What most people mean when they "switch to Wayland" is that they're switching from Gnome on X11 to a "pure Gnome" stack that uses Wayland and a bunch of other Freedesktop standards for interopability. There is absolutely no code from the "Wayland project" running there, because the Wayland implementation is Gnome's own (it's…

I completely agree. But as a user the distinction doesn't matter.

Precisely this.

There's a meta-lesson useful here for anyone who doesn't know it yet: modern software has network effects. And the same phenomena you see with other networks apply to software stacks. If everyone else has implemented a protocol wrong, for example, and your software comes along that has implemented the protocol correctly, but as a result your software doesn't work with the existing stack,

a) Odds are, the rest of the world will not change to work with your software

b) New users, using your software, will perceive the problem is your software doesn't work, not that the rest of the stack is wrong and you're the only one that did it right.

Maddening, but it's the nature of complicated systems built by thousands of people in a distributed fashion.

(I can't lay hands on the link right now, but there was an ex-Microsoft engineer who had a blog where he talked about the heroics MS developers would go to every major Windows release making sure their OS was compatible with popular user software. It didn't matter that they were the company setting the rules in their ecosystem... If the latest version of Windows broke Photoshop, they had to figure out why. In that particular instance, it was because Photoshop had gained some performance optimizations by baking binary images of default structs the OS gave it into their code instead of calling the right API to get a struct properly initialized, saving a library call. MS had to reimplement some C++ structures in C so they could maintain the memory image of the relevant structs to avoid breaking Photoshop).

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

#225

Post by adkadskhj »

robert_foss wrote: post #192
adkadskhj wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea i'm confused by this line. I'm a Linux-desktop-noob, but i was going to use i3-Wayland, aka Sway, and because i have an Nvidia i was told don't bother. Nvidia Drivers + Wayland sound broken? Now that may not be true.. but it seemed clear cut. I wanted to try Wayland really bad because i have a multi-DPI monitor setup, and Xorg is awful at that. Yet, it seemed too early. Nvidia isn't exactly some niche product. No…

NVidia is broken, not Wayland. They refuse to implement the same APIs as everyone other driver does. Wayland is 10 years old, and extremely stable. If it isn't working properly it's either your driver vendor or your desktop environment that is to blame.

Sure, i'm willing to accept that - but is your solution for me to buy a new graphics card?

How much of the market share is Nvidia? A stupid quick search's top result says 80%. So 80% of PCs can't run Wayland?

To be clear, i know nothing of compositors/etc, I've had nothing but problems with Xorg, and i want to use Wayland. _and yet_ - it seems like there is not a single PC in my house, or any of my family, that can run Wayland.

I'm happy to accept your statement of where the blame lies. But if you're telling me Nvidia can't run Wayland currently.. does it matter to the end user? When "Most PCs" can't run Wayland his statement of "precious use-case" seems off base.

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

#226

Post by barrkel »

foldr wrote: post #170
lewispollard wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 prett…

> 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. To be honest I don’t see how you can understand the first bit but not the second. Yes, they can make changes that you don’t like without consulting you.

They can; but they shouldn't expect a life free of complaints.

Commercial software, like most things in life, is responsive to incentives. The people who buy things get the most say in the product.

For open source where the end users aren't buying anything, and the developers are either creating product for their own gratification, or for some more nebulous corporate goal, the incentives are rather indirect. And that makes a big difference. Software, under those conditions, will frankly be worse for the majority of users.

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

#228

Post by varbhat »

kevincox wrote: post #194
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…

> So, didn't it make that security claim irrelevant because each window can access the screen? No, because these APIs allow the user to audit the requests and allow or deny. You could have a default-allow policy and get back to the X security but most implementations ask you to confirm first.

Ok. Thanks for the Information. But,last time i tried Wayland (sway to be specific) , it didn't ask me to allow/deny ,ie, no audit was present.
Post reply on HN