Live data from Hacker News

Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

joshondesign.com

231–240 of 259 posts

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That link is a blatant lie. Redirect each wayland client's stderr to a different term and you will see that the process (keyboard/mice input + graphics output) isolation is still working as intended.

It's not a blatant lie. There is probably no default install in which I would not feel it absolutely necessary to change every credential stored on a system if it ever ran a compromised binary and a new install from scratch. At best you are hoping that the malicious binary someone tricked you into running didn't also take advantage of an additional vulnerability to compromise everything. Keeping in mind that your adv…

It's a blatant lie because the author of that code snippet is trying to trick the reader into thinking that Wayland's isolation somehow has been broken, but that's not true at all.

In the real world, any secure desktop solution is going to require a reliable execution environment ("security is only as good as your weakest link"). If you don't trust the user to properly handle that, then you must ensure they don't do anything stupid or dangerous to themselves by restricting what they can do. For desktop applications this usually means to execute them in a sandbox (such as Flatpak). QubeOS tries to do something similar, but stumbles upon the inherently insecure design of the X Server, and has to work around it running separate X server instances for each unreliable X client.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this hasn't been an issue in almost 20 years.

How many distros will install e.g. the proprietary (i.e. covering most recent hardware) NVidia drivers out of the box? If I remember correctly, Ubuntu only just now started doing this.

You don't need the proprietary nvidia drivers to drive a display at native resolution.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#233
post #167
post #9

I enjoyed the article but this quote jumped out at me: "What took thirty years to build isn't going to be replaced in a day." This was in regard to replacing X11 with Wayland. It's funny because it would be closer to the truth to say that X11 took 5 years to build, and for the last 25 years everyone has been trying to get off of it, but in the meantime piling more stuff on top of it since that's easier than starting…

> since that's easier than starting from scratch That is not quite accurate, although it isn't far off. More accurately; the design mistakes that make/made X11 terrible were being enforced at the driver level. Take the fact that for many years X was being run as root on linux. Horrific state of affairs for security. Everyone knows it is bad. Some bright spark tries to write a new window system that runs as an unprivi…

> Take the fact that for many years X was being run as root on linux.

Every other driver on Linux has a kernel part and a userspace API accessed through /dev devices or syscalls. It was always unclear why X needed to be any different, but I think this was more about implementation than something fundamental to X. Of course "X" is a lot of things to a lot of people, and it depends whether we're talking about the server, the protocol, the client, the extensions, the window manager, the widget library, etc.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#234
post #9

I enjoyed the article but this quote jumped out at me: "What took thirty years to build isn't going to be replaced in a day." This was in regard to replacing X11 with Wayland. It's funny because it would be closer to the truth to say that X11 took 5 years to build, and for the last 25 years everyone has been trying to get off of it, but in the meantime piling more stuff on top of it since that's easier than starting…

The reason X11 got pushed through so quickly 30 years ago was that some vendors were threatening to standardize on X10. Maybe they should have just gone with X10, because it would have been easier to eventually replace.

It's a real shame that MGR never got any traction (I think license problems and it came along too late). It was really "X done right". https://hack.org/mc/mgr/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ManaGeR

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screen tearing, bad performance, bad touchscreen support (not independent of mouse cursor), and especially important these days: no real HiDPI support (practically impossible to support different scales for different monitors). It's not good enough.

There is no tearing with proper drivers and window managers. This was a problem in the past, but now is largely overstated.

I never even knew what the problem was supposed to be. A window isn't rendered absolutely perfectly when I drag it around? How is that even an issue that anyone cares about?! Do you spend all day moving windows around? Compared to major flaws in Wayland like not being able to use a program at all on a remote desktop, it's trivialities.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure there is, starting with the difficulty in setting up, getting it to output the correct resolution with your monitor, correct refresh rate, etc..

this hasn't been an issue in almost 20 years.

Just google "can't get linux to display correct resolution"

You'll get plenty of results like this that are more recent than 1999.

https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2012264

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#237
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp. Those solutions don't do what X remote desktop does, though. Namely, those let you share a desktop rather than providing independent remote desktops.

to my knowledge, to supply multiple X remote desktops, you need to SPAWN multiple X desktops. and thats no a proper way to scale its number - they all are independent and not sharing common resources(incl. incoming ports)

I think how X works with this (and a lot of other stuff) can be very fairly criticized. Despite the implementation drawbacks, though, I use this ability heavily and in practice it gives me no trouble. Plus, I'm unaware of any other solution to this use case.

It doesn't scale well if you're talking about dozens of simultaneous desktops, yes, but I rarely have more than three at a time. It's fine for that.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#238
post #45
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Abandoning X is abandoning a power we have. A power that literally no one uses. Well, no one that matters anyway. For values of "matter" equivalent to "uses a modern desktop". Whatever the case, modern development heavily favors coding for the common case, not supporting a flexible framework that can accommodate fringe cases. And in 2019, your use case is fringe.

> A power that literally no one uses. I just told how I used it. > Well, no one that matters anyway. I don't matter? That's kind of rude. > Whatever the case, modern development heavily favors coding for the common case, not supporting a flexible framework that can accommodate fringe cases. And in 2019, your use case is fringe. Are you going to say that accessibility features should also be discarded? Being deaf or b…

"Modernity", "network transparency is irrelevant in $CURRENT_YEAR" and "nobody uses those features anymore" are among the most commonly cited reasons why you must abandon X NOW and switch to Wayland. Those and "muh security". (The very real security issues with Xorg could be mitigated or eliminated completely with a more sophisticated X server design.)

Like it or not, you will have to come to grips with the fact that the Linux desktop and graphics-stack discussion is dominated by developers from the age of GNOME, who haven't put much thought in beyond how they personally use their own MacBooks. These are the ones calling the shots, and they've decided that X is obsolete, that network transparency is cruft that should be eliminated, and that Wayland is suited to task. So Wayland will be the supported solution going forward.

> Are you going to say that accessibility features should also be discarded? Being deaf or blind are not the common case.

Given the shit state of accessibility under Linux, I'd say yes, it is fringe to the people building the Linux desktop. If you're disabled, it makes much more sense to get a Mac or Windows machine.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this hasn't been an issue in almost 20 years.

Just google "can't get linux to display correct resolution" You'll get plenty of results like this that are more recent than 1999. https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2012264

There are 2 things that cause this. Not having a driver installed and having it fall back to something which doesn't support the correct resolution or in fact bad cables.

Most user installs will not encounter either problem. New amd has great support out of the box without installing anything and many distros support installing closed source nvidia or will work well enough for non gaming applications with the open source drivers.

Please note that challenges aren't a result of X they are specifically the result of specific manufacturers drivers. Some of which have been more challenging in the past. For improvements on such in the future look to the manufacturers and support the ones that provide the optimal experience.

Please note issues where users can't set the correct resolution for their hardware ALSO occurs on windows 10.

Link from Winter 2018 https://troubleshooter.xyz/wiki/fix-cant-change-screen-resol...

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#240
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this hasn't been an issue in almost 20 years.

Yet my open source AMD driver doesn't do everything that the deprecated fxglr was capable of, and even less than the DirectX 11 version of it.

Examples?
Post reply on HN