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

PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 208 posts

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#131

Post by charcircuit »

Lammy wrote: post #102
charcircuit wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

40 years ago people did not care about malicous applications, nor did they care about jank, nor did they have the hindsights that we do know. Those API only still exist because of backwards compatibility.

I also don't care about malicious applications. I don't need to be protected from myself and didn't ask anyone to try.

Even if you are someone who wrote their whole user space from scratch and don't use the internet or open any files made by others, you are not representative of the larger userbase. A lot of people download random software or libraries that could be malware or even just buggy (eg. The time Steam unintentionally deleted user files). These people want to gain utility from all of this software without having to worry about the software being able to do bad things.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#132

Post by caslon »

reisse wrote: post #33

Quoting @stenzek > But Wayland is just broken, and everyone would rather sit around arguing with each other instead of actually addressing the design flaws. > It's not the first time such a proposal has been put forward. Something that developers need for their applications to work properly on WL (particularly multi-window applications), and it gets vetoed. Every other OS manages this fine. But apparently we're in th…

Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; it's the default on distributions like Fedora, and has been for a while. It has nice things. For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter.

Similar, but much less catastrophic, to how Android isn't great for blind users, or people who want to do low-latency audio production, Wayland is actually great for most users, despite not appealing to extremely niche use cases. It's objectively better for most real-time use cases.

I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% of things anyone wants to do with a computer. It's not a square wheel at all.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#133

Post by marcus0x62 »

Arnavion wrote: post #55
ryandrake wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you can't position windows absolutely, but that's because you're not supposed to do that. Why not? This seems like a pretty opinionated policy from something that's supposed to be a platform to enable applications. Why should some other developer dictate how an application should work? I'd expect "My way or the highway" from Apple, but not from a linux API.

It's more nuanced than "should be able to do it" and "shouldn't be able to do it". The problem is covered in the wayland-protocols MR that the PCSX2 PR author also linked to (and failed to appreciate): https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/m...

I don’t think anyone “failed to appreciate” that thread. The core reasoning on the part of the Wayland devs was absurd beyond belief.

“Applications and users decide what's actually optional - if 10 applications work on all the popular compositors but don't work in one with a novel approach to window management, then that compositor is considered broken, not the applications.”

So, the obvious solution to the problem is, apparently, to have no solution and have everything broken. Genius.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#134

Post by wtallis »

jwells89 wrote: post #107
wtallis wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't ImGui applications do multiple windows while leaving the positioning up to somebody else (the user or their window manager)?

Imagine a program that utilizes several separate windows for palettes. If the program has no way to specify where to place those palettes, the user is going to be presented with a ton of palettes piled on top of their document window and that they’ll have to sort that out themselves, rather than a neatly organized immediately usable workspace. That’s not really an acceptable user experience no matter how you slice it…

> That’s not really an acceptable user experience no matter how you slice it.

What you're describing is what happens in most desktop environments any time you open multiple document windows at once. Why is it so much more unacceptable for this to happen to tool palette windows? Yeah, it's obviously not good behavior, but it's prevalent enough that it's clearly a manageable problem for end users and generally preferable to refusing to support multiple windows at all.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#135

Post by frio »

reisse wrote: post #33

Quoting @stenzek > But Wayland is just broken, and everyone would rather sit around arguing with each other instead of actually addressing the design flaws. > It's not the first time such a proposal has been put forward. Something that developers need for their applications to work properly on WL (particularly multi-window applications), and it gets vetoed. Every other OS manages this fine. But apparently we're in th…

Honestly at this stage, this stuff starts to feel like FUD. Every computer I use -- work laptop, personal desktop, personal laptop -- uses Wayland at this stage. Two are on Sway, one's on KDE. I cannot think of any show-stopping bugs I've encountered for... years.

It was a lot more rough 3 years ago when I first switched over (because the laptop I had then was HiDPI, but the screen I attached it to was standard, and X was _horrible_ across these two screens) -- but these days, it all just goes.

I'm sure the process of hashing things out with the various committees is slow and laborious, but for a relatively normal set of desktop needs -- browser, IDEs, games, some photography work (albeit without having done any colour profile management, I know that's missing -- but my gear/monitors aren't up to that really anyway), it's fine.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#136

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

charcircuit wrote: post #128
fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I find the creep of web app security mentality into the desktop to be a disaster. I want to be able to easily snoop on and control my GUI and I absolutely don’t want some display system to decide it knows better than me about this sort of thing.

>web app security mentality Having good security is essential to having a good app platform. You can see a real disaster in how malware operated on Windows a couple decades ago. >I want to be able to easily snoop on and control my GUI That don't mean that every random program needs to be able to. If a program is to be able to snoop, it needs to explicitly given the ability to do so.

> That don't mean that every random program needs to be able to. If a program is to be able to snoop, it needs to explicitly given the ability to do so.

I strongly disagree with this, this is how you get inconsistent, annoying computing experiences

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#137

Post by jwells89 »

wtallis wrote: post #134
jwells89 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a program that utilizes several separate windows for palettes. If the program has no way to specify where to place those palettes, the user is going to be presented with a ton of palettes piled on top of their document window and that they’ll have to sort that out themselves, rather than a neatly organized immediately usable workspace. That’s not really an acceptable user experience no matter how you slice it…

> That’s not really an acceptable user experience no matter how you slice it. What you're describing is what happens in most desktop environments any time you open multiple document windows at once. Why is it so much more unacceptable for this to happen to tool palette windows? Yeah, it's obviously not good behavior, but it's prevalent enough that it's clearly a manageable problem for end users and generally preferab…

macOS will actually cascade multiple document windows opened at once so long as the dev has taken a moment to flag the windows as document windows, which still isn’t amazing but at least ensures that all opened windows are visible.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#138

Post by hollerith »

Public service announcement: you might have switched from X to Wayland (as display server) without your having realized simply by upgrading your distro. To find out: printenv XDG_SESSION_TYPE

BTW, Linux/Wayland has been my daily driver for 3 years, and I'm happy with it though I don't have Nvidia graphics and don't need to record or share my screen.

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#139

Post by Zambyte »

bsder wrote: post #100
Zambyte wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more interesting how Wayland has worked fine for me on AMD, Intel, and Nvidia for the last 4 years on my personal machines and work machines, and yet here we are still talking about if it works or not.

If I simply plug and unplug my laptop from the dock, my windows wind up randomly scattered between both laptop and monitor. Is that considered "works"? Lots of people have lots of complaints. I, myself, have more than a few. I'll go further. The fundamental problem is that Wayland CAN NOT be fixed. The underlying design architecture is simply not correct for modern hardware and its abstractions. The problem is that a…

> If I simply plug and unplug my laptop from the dock, my windows wind up randomly scattered between both laptop and monitor. Is that considered "works"?

1) that doesn't happen on my compositor

2) You can solve that yourself or pay someone to solve it for you. Unless you have a contract, you are not entitled to anyone elses time.

> The fundamental problem is that Wayland CAN NOT be fixed. The underlying design architecture is simply not correct for modern hardware and its abstractions.

I simply don't care. It works for me, better than anything else I've tried on any operating system. The fact that you disagree with Wayland abstractions has no impact on my real world use.

> [...] Both of those toolkits are 20+ years old and desperately need to be redone from the ground up.

Great idea, looking forward to your (contractors?) repo :-)

Re: PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support

#140

Post by devit »

v1ne wrote: post #63

This discussion about monitor-aware positioning of windows relative to another is a real treasure trove: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/m... One post summarizes it pretty well. Jehan says: > As GIMP maintainer, do you want me to open a separate report so that we explain our use case on multiple windows, as well as future planned use cases? I find it fascinating. There is this supposed succ…

That's obviously the only correct approach.

The concept of "window position on screen" makes no sense, since a compositor is allowed to display windows arbitrarily, and doesn't necessarily display them as 2D rectangles (for instance, they could be displayed in a VR environment at arbitrary 3D positions, or they could be warped arbitrarily, etc.).

Also, the window layout belongs to the user and compositor and it would be a security hole to let applications affect it.

If you want to position subwindows, you need to draw the subwindows yourself inside a main window like e.g. VSCode does with its various panes.

Post reply on HN