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

XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

ostechnix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 204 posts

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#181

Post by mikae1 »

kelnos wrote: post #126
mikae1 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And , no Client Side Decorations. XFCE died for me the day they adopted it. Inconsistency-hell ensued. LXQt if you want something with less features, Plasma if you want more features. They're both performant.

> And, no Client Side Decorations. XFCE died for me the day they adopted it. Inconsistency-hell ensued. Not sure what you mean. We have CSDs available for people who like it, but they can be turned on and off. If you're talking about random GTK apps that run on Xfce, there's not much we can do about that; we don't set app policy. That's one of the nicer things about Wayland, though: there's a way for the compositor t…

> If you're talking about random GTK apps that run on Xfce, there's not much we can do about that; we don't set app policy.

Yes, guess you're correct. Qt apps in Plasma was a better mix for me. I have consistency and no funky titlebars.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#182

Post by mikae1 »

heresie-dabord wrote: post #75
mikae1 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And , no Client Side Decorations. XFCE died for me the day they adopted it. Inconsistency-hell ensued. LXQt if you want something with less features, Plasma if you want more features. They're both performant.

It's absurd that people who recommend "light" Linux distros mention DEs that are much heavier than LXQt and LXDE. As for Wayland, I use it on a Raspberry Pi 4 (Raspbian xwayland). It works well enough, but there is some kind of bug that causes xwayland to fill the swap space at almost 100%. When this happens, I find it necessary to close applications to reduce the swap usage.

What do you mean by heavy though? Plasma is feature heavy but definitely not memory heavy.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#183

Post by consteval »

bombela wrote: post #45
IWeldMelons wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KDE is actually lighter. And hidpi is much better on Qt.

Alright I do use KDE those days. I have used XFCE before. I don't think I can believe that KDE is lighter in term of response/lag. I didn't check the ram usage because Firefox is taking it all anyways.

I think KDE can be lighter in terms of response/lag if you turn off animations. On most desktops with dedicated graphics though it probably doesn't matter. Definitely on those older Intel 6000 type graphics and earlier though it does make a big difference.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#184

Post by consteval »

IWeldMelons wrote: post #172
tankenmate wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But unfortunately KDE is Wayland only now, so no way to turn the compositor off.

I run x11 on my Debian 12.

I do too, but this doesn't really count because Debian Stable is still plasma 5.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#185

Post by consteval »

FloatArtifact wrote: post #136
bitwize wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If accessibility is a serious concern, Linux is probably not the OS for you. It's so far behind in accessibility compared to Windows it's not even funny.

> If accessibility is a serious concern, Linux is probably not the OS for you. It's so far behind in accessibility compared to Windows it's not even funny. Linux is fine with X11 per my requirements above. The biggest problem is the fragmentation caused by Wayland. I cant develop software that targets any reasonable range of desktop environments much less, the features needed. If Wayland was left and X11 was right th…

> I cant develop software that targets any reasonable range of desktop environments

I highly recommend Qt for this purpose.

Gtk has been a hot mess for the past few years with Gtk4 and libadwaita shenanigans. However, Qt has continued to evolve incrementally without dropping any backwards functionality.

It's incredibly full-featured and has amazing tooling. In addition to Qt Creator you also have the CLI tools for packaging and whatnot and KDE has Kirigami for components.

The nice thing is that Qt applications look pretty good in native environments like plasma, but they also look pretty good in Gtk environments, including older Gtk-3 desktops and newer Gtk-4 desktops. So you cover all your bases. You also get Mobile and Windows/Mac, if anybody cares.

The two real downsides are:

- GPL

- C++ only (ish). There's other bindings but they will not have the same level and quality of tooling. Gtk has less tooling overall, but MUCH more high-quality bindings.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#186

Post by consteval »

mkgreen wrote: post #124
EasyMark wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not going to go away. Wayland is here to stay.

And so is X11. We are heading for a dual stack desktops. There are tons of expensive applications that target Linux _because_ of X11 and they will rather force users to switch OSes than get rewritten.

I think it's trivial to run X11 applications under wayland, in a sandbox.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#187

Post by consteval »

AlienRobot wrote: post #145
ac29 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> XFCE, Lxqt, Mate, and Cinnamon don't. XFCE, Lxqt, Mate all have at least partial wayland support. Cinnamon has experimental support.

That's not support. That's support. If that counts, then X11 having legacy support counts as well.

I don't agree, because experimental support means it's being worked on. Legacy support means the opposite - it's not being worked on and never will be worked on.

So for now it happens to work. But none of those DEs are contributing to the X.org implementation of X11, right? So it will slowly break down over time. That's the current status of X11, it's on hospice.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#188

Post by consteval »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #103
bitwize wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "Wayland thing" is what the X devs would rather work on instead of X. It's the future. Best to rip the Band-Aid off now.

Perhaps if the X devs want people to migrate, they should consider giving Wayland all the features of X. Otherwise people are going to keep using the thing that works.

There's 0 point in making a new software if you're just going to inherit all the fundamental design flaws that make the original software unmaintainable.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#189

Post by tuna74 »

FloatArtifact wrote: post #71

My accessibility needs are dead under Wayland. There needs to be shortcuts that can be emulated per application and global shortcuts. Their security model won't allow this. I don't know how accessibility and automation tools are going to get by trying to support every wayland compositor.

It is probably much better if the compositor implements parts of the accessibility functionality. Then you can have other parts as libraries and in the toolkits, but the integration should probably be in the compositor.

Re: XFCE 4.20 aims to bring preliminary Wayland support

#190

Post by AlienRobot »

consteval wrote: post #187
AlienRobot wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not support. That's support. If that counts, then X11 having legacy support counts as well.

I don't agree, because experimental support means it's being worked on. Legacy support means the opposite - it's not being worked on and never will be worked on. So for now it happens to work. But none of those DEs are contributing to the X.org implementation of X11, right? So it will slowly break down over time. That's the current status of X11, it's on hospice.

The current status of X11 is that it works.

The current status of Wayland is that it doesn't.

It's really that simple. I think this exchange can help you understand my position better: https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL/pull/9345#issuecomment-201...

>Wayland has a myriad of unresolved problems regarding surface suspension blocking presentation and the FIFO (vsync) implementation being fundamentally broken leading to reduced GPU-bound performance.

To which someone replies:

>If we do this, we are basically accepting these issues are unfixable for the next ten years (SDL4). Having this as the default in SDL3 (which isn't being used yet!) is important for signaling to other stakeholders that we actually do need to get solutions in place for detected issues.

To which the committer says:

>SDL is not your tool for "signaling to stakeholders" about what is important. It's an actual library used by real developers and users!

Likewise. My PC is not a tool for signaling library/DE developers that there are more and more people using Wayland now and that they can finally stop maintaining X11 legacy code. I use my PC for real things. I couldn't care less if things are running on X11 or Wayland so long as they work.

If Wayland isn't working with my use case, I just won't use it. I won't switch to Wayland juts to beta test it, and then spend years begging people who know how to hack Linux to implement the features I need that I had on X11.

If Linux drops X11, and Wayland still doesn't work. I won't use Wayland. I'll use Windows.

Post reply on HN