I as a user haven't seen any reason to care about Wayland. And losing/dropping X11's network transparency seems rather surprising in a heavily networked world...
Wayland on OpenBSD
31–40 of 214 posts
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable should tell you how far software developers have fallen in the la…
I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration,…
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, running X11 over a network worked very poorly. There is significant overlap between former X11 developers and Wayland developers. They didn't drop it because they are incompetent which seems to be what your are implying. The people that decided to drop it are probably the people that know X11 the best.
It didn't work poorly back when X clients were actually using Xlib for drawing primitives performed by the display server. It started working poorly when X clients started rendering everything locally in the client and simply pushing pixels to the display server.
Which means it works poorly for modern apps. Modern apps use the GPU for client-side rendering.
And it absolutely worked poorly even in the 90s. It was virtually impossible to run X apps over anything but a fast local LAN. That's what "Broadway"/LBX was about. It was kind of a failure.
RDP has been a better networked display protocol than X for a couple decades now. Let's not fool ourselves that X isn't obsolete on every axis.
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#34It seems even in BSD-land, people are thinking seriously about moving on from X.
Netcraft sure as hell confirms it now: X11 is dying.
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is about preparing for a post X11 future. As Wayland continues to mature, classic X will attract fewer developer resources. I think it will eventually start to suffer benign neglect, and stop keeping up with new hardware.
> I think it will eventually start to suffer benign neglect, and stop keeping up with new hardware. At least on Linux, Xorg and Wayland compositors use the same underlying APIs, so the chances of Xorg not running somewhere Wayland runs are pretty much zero - unless said new hardware is only exposed via a new kernel API and nobody bothers to update the modesetting driver for it and/or to write a new Xorg driver for th…
Not really. KWin has Wayland specific paths that simply don't work on X and developers are increasingly simply not bothering to go out of their way with X if something isn't possible to implement over it. So X use case is going to further deteriorate, that's inevitable.
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration,…
Your memory of config file nightmares (I had them too) is a decade old now. X11 works without config for the vast majority of users. Yes it took a while to get there, but it's been there for a good while now and not really anything for Wayland to point at as a differentiator.
It's at least 2 decades old, if it was ever a real problem in the first place.
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable should tell you how far software developers have fallen in the la…
I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration,…
With a compositor other than the Gnome one?
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is about preparing for a post X11 future. As Wayland continues to mature, classic X will attract fewer developer resources. I think it will eventually start to suffer benign neglect, and stop keeping up with new hardware.
Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable should tell you how far software developers have fallen in the la…
Factually false, and easily known. Starting with most distros defaulting to wayland, Myself using it full time with zoom, screenshots I'm sure many things you say don't work
> far software developers have fallen in the last 30 years.
You can't be serious
> They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done.
You must really hate HTTP as spec. HTTP is so lazy. Could not even implement transport security or even TCP like functionality. Composability and layers are quite overrated
But I guess I should just not feed the troll
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable should tell you how far software developers have fallen in the la…
I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration,…
Such as having a modern wide gamut/HDR display, or a display without a blue spectrum spike. Or printing anything in color. Or doing photography or digital painting. Or switching to another compositor on a non-default keyboard layout (as Wayland doesn't have the replacement for this basic X functionality, compositors are forced to reinvent the wheel).
It's fine to have the "works on my machine" attitude for a user discussing this on the web. I just hope the devs of what is being pushed as a replacement for what works don't have it. (and the signals aren't good)
Re: Wayland on OpenBSD
#40I as a user haven't seen any reason to care about Wayland. And losing/dropping X11's network transparency seems rather surprising in a heavily networked world...
In my experience, running X11 over a network worked very poorly. There is significant overlap between former X11 developers and Wayland developers. They didn't drop it because they are incompetent which seems to be what your are implying. The people that decided to drop it are probably the people that know X11 the best.
Back when X11 was gaining traction the LAN was 10mbps and WAN was 1.5mbps.
Now people have true 1Gbit connections to the WAN and can easily have 10gbit or much more on the LAN...