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

The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

phoronix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 714 posts

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#271

Post by sergeykish »

taeric wrote: post #251
ddevault wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a fair comparison. You're benchmarking GNOME, not Wayland, and making generalizations about Wayland based on GNOME benchmarks is a false equivalency. Is GNOME on Wayland worse than GNOME on X11? Perhaps. Is Wayland worse than X11, based on that answer? No.

I get your point. But until those benchmarks at least correlate with behavior users see, they are not worth much.

Protocol limits what is possible. Legacy defines performance. Gnome is X11 first. Wlroots in Wayland first. It should be possible to optimize Gnome.

Wayland was created because of horrible X11 performance [1]. It is not Waylands prime time yet but X.Org still works and maintained. Phoronix.com should have checked contributions [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ

[2] https://github.com/freedesktop/xorg-xserver/graphs/commit-ac...

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#272

Post by grep_name »

darthrupert wrote: post #115
znpy wrote: post #38

I am not necessarily against Wayland or new things in general. But it bothers me when no clear upgrade path is defined ("drop your stuff" is not acceptable) and a half-hassed incomplete solution is proposed instead, and backwards compatibility is pretty much disregarded. For what concerns my personal computing, I'll stay on Xorg until XFCE supports Wayland. Then I'll update.

Wayland was the last straw for me. It made me switch to Macs after 20 years of almost exclusive Linux on the desktop and a few dev stints. It was cool when my time was less expensive. I check the state of the linux world about once a year still. And obviously keep using it on the servers. Best of luck to everyone using it for desktop. I totally get why you do it, but it's just not for me right now.

Have you considered using a tiling window manager? I've been using bspwm for years and it just uses X. I don't really miss anything about floating window managers, and since switching everything feels more stable and portable

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#273

Post by acgkmopvvgvmgv »

Avamander wrote: post #264
acgkmopvvgvmgv wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canonical announced Mir out of nowhere in an attempt to gain control just like they are trying now with Snap. After the announcement of Mir their developers went to IRC and made abundantly clear they had no idea how Wayland works and that Mir was useless. Where is Mir now? Using Wayland. People who were in the fence about supporting Wayland were now even more convinced they should ignore it. That's one of the reasons…

> Where is Mir now? Using Wayland. It could have not gone that way. Now we've got two equally bad alternatives out there. > That's one of the reasons a decade later you still have this much FUD. I don't think you know what FUD means.

Nice ignore the part where they realized Mir was useless. They even went on an edit spree in their wiki page.

If Mir was so good and superior they would just keep developing it. Isn't that obvious? If the company who already spent all this dev time aka money on Mir doesn't believe in it, why would anybody else? They were even eating their own dog food and had some major industry pull at their disposal. The answer is they fucked it up.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#274

Post by akvadrako »

jcelerier wrote: post #85
akvadrako wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If those are your best arguments against Wayland you are making a good case for it because: input is broken and inconsistent – what? screenshots don't work – they do. I use them all the time. remoting is broken – I know it's supported but I've never wanted to do it. every WM has to be rewritten or abandoned – of course, that's by design. Wayland doesn't even have WMs. c&p handling are not yet there – do you mean copy…

> screenshots don't work – they do. I use them all the time. they don't work on wayland, they work on specific compositors that implement an extension.

Wayland is a protocol, like X. X.org is an implementation, like a compositor.

Screenshots require a privileged application to have access to the whole screen. The X protocol doesn’t provide that, though some implementation might.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#275

Post by cycloptic »

mort96 wrote: post #265
cycloptic wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GLFW and SDL are looking at using libdecoration to draw CSDs. Yes it's an additional dependency but most applications won't need to worry about it unless they need it. The way GNOME is built it's not really possible architecturally for them to support SSDs in Wayland. Maybe that will change if they ever get around to redesigning mutter and gnome-shell, but I wouldn't wait for it.

I've seen libdecoration, and yeah, that seems like their intended solution to this. It doesn't seem like a terrible solution, but last time I looked at it at least, libdecoration was a long way off being production ready, and GNOME with Wayland is shipping _right now_ and must be supported.

You can use a library like that or you can draw your own decorations. There unfortunately is no other option. I don't see it as being likely that GNOME will support SSD any time soon, it just isn't designed for that.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#276

Post by akvadrako »

jcelerier wrote: post #210
m4rtink wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there even any Wayland compositors in actual use that don't support that extension?

if you go to r/unixporn there are a ton of custom X11 WMs with very very small userbase - sometimes a dozen individuals. Screenshotting works with all of them.

WMs are not compositors. Compositors are more like a WM combined with X.org.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#277

Post by [deleted] »

ddevault wrote: post #163
verroq wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only really care about performance and Wayland hasn’t been very convincing [0] with no discernible improvement over X11. [0] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GNOME-Xo...

GNOME is not a good representative of Wayland. Wayland is just a protocol - it's up to the compositors to have good performance to distinguish it from Xorg, and GNOME does not do well in this regard. Other compositors, particularly wlroots, enjoy excellent performance. Wayland also opens the door to many performance improvements which are not possible on Xorg, and which take advantage of newer GPU features, especiall…

[deleted]

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#278

Post by akvadrako »

jcelerier wrote: post #258
ywei3410 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While technically correct, this misses the point. Very few features are part of the core Wayland protocol; off the top of my bind, there's the input methods, and a few ways to describe shared memory with the compositor and some callbacks to handle device registration. That's it. For example, top level windows and popups themselves are an extension in Wayland ( xdg_shell protocol rather than the defunct wl_shell ), an…

> Very few features are part of the core Wayland protocol; but that is the main critique. Most of the things not being part of core means that there is a lot more fragmentation of the linux desktop than there was with X, which is unilaterally a bad thing.

The Wayland base can be implemented in a library, like wlroots, which complete compositors could use.

Currently compositor developers prefer separate implementations and it's really their choice.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#279

Post by pas »

andreyv wrote: post #204
dralley wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wayland is also, with its forced composition, hostile to interactive applications requiring low latency, e.g. video games. https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gnomes-mutter-gets-fu...

In fast-paced games it is essential to disable vertical synchronization as well, trading possible tearing for less input lag. Does Wayland support this?

You can draw to the OpenGL/EGL surfaces directly (Weston 5.0+ has composition bypass).

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#280

Post by sergeykish »

grandinj wrote: post #165
gtirloni wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is forcing you to use Wayland. Or are they? On Fedora it's a single line change em /etc to disable it (which I do because of Nvidia).

Except that, in the name of progress, various things are broken in the x11 world too on fedora, as a direct consequence of the wayland updates. Which is unfortunate

Fedora switched to Wayland, that is unfortunate for X.Org users but basically it means someone stopped fixing issues.

You either fix them yourself and contribute back if possible. Or switch to distribution where someone still fixes these issues.

I've investigated X.Org caused bug just for two days and since then totally support Wayland development. What we have today is not healthy.

Post reply on HN