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

I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 892 posts

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#271

Post by Quekid5 »

unanswered wrote: post #169
alyandon wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can fix the problematic service with: systemctl edit service-name [Service] TimeoutStopSec=XX You can also override the global default DefaultTimeoutStopSec in /etc/systemd/system.conf.

See, this right here is the (technical, not social) problem with systemd. Whether anyone points out that systemd is doing something stupid and wrong, the systemd shills' answer is always "well duh what did you expect when you didn't modify one of the hundred default configuration files to have `[stupidshit] = false`! You brought this on yourself!" And you're lucky if that even works to solve the problem.

On this particular issue I find it hard to fault them for using a (perhaps overly) safe default.

Summarily killing processes with a SIGKILL should really be a last resort because it can very easily corrupt data.

If you have processes which just hang for ages during shutdown, there is probably something wrong with your system (or the process's code) which might warrant further investigation.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#272

Post by znpy »

BoysenberryPi wrote: post #31

I have no beef with Wayland specifically and I agree that if you are harassing maintainers of any project you're probably an asshole. However, >Maybe Wayland doesn’t work for your precious use-case. More likely, it does work, and you swallowed some propaganda based on an assumption which might have been correct 7 years ago. I'm a game developer. None of the software I use works reliably or at all on Wayland. None of…

that's imho the core problem with wayland advocates:

- if you rely on something that doesn't currently work on wayland and you write about it on (for example) hacker news then you're the asshole and you should be dropping that something and switch to wayland (which of course, most of us cannot do)

- if your current setup works and you'd rater spend your time doing your stuff instead of rebuilding on wayland, you're an asshole

rinse and repeat.

Most wayland advocates can't seem to understand the philosopy of "I don't really care about xorg vs wayland, my current xorg-based setup works well enough for me, i'll switch when I can be equally productive on wayland".

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#273

Post by forgotmypw17 »

boudin wrote: post #237
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well yeah, i just got used to it working a certain way, now i gotta figure it out again. fucking nerds acting like it,s no big deal when shit i use every day is all changed up. do you have any idea how much cognitive load that is for the average user to figure out new ui? and usually for no good reason, just to change shit up so someone can get credit for a project. don,t blame the users for software being shit. it,s…

The reverse is also true. Don't blame people maintaining software for changing your routine. You make a lot of assumptions there but the reality is often much more nuanced. Everything changes, all the time, that's a rule that is true for absolutely everything in life.

i,ve been in the software world for 2+ decades, worn all kinds of hats, and obviously been on the user and support side quite a bit too. i know what i,m talking about here.

most software changes are unnecessary and are forced on users unnecessarily, and that,s why people hate software.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#274

Post by jpsalm »

gnulinux wrote: post #204
DCKing wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but there's no such thing as "switching to Wayland". What most people mean when they "switch to Wayland" is that they're switching from Gnome on X11 to a "pure Gnome" stack that uses Wayland and a bunch of other Freedesktop standards for interopability. There is absolutely no code from the "Wayland project" running there, because the Wayland implementation is Gnome's own (it's…

Why does this distinction matter? Gnome on X works perfectly fine, Gnome on Wayland does not. Why does it matter it to state that Wayland is a protocol, not the implementation?

Gnome on Wayland works pretty great for me. (No issues with brightness etc). Occasionally I log into an X11 session because Wayland screen sharing doesn't work that great.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#275

Post by Deganta »

I think one of the biggest problems of Wayland are the "non standard, but kind of necessary" extensions.

E.g. screencapture. Does Wayland support screencapture? Yes (kind of), but I can't write a Wayland screencapture app. I need to write a Gnome screencapture app or a wslroot screencapture app, or I can even write one that supports both.

But what if someone using the new Future Desktop Environment wants to use my app? It probably won't work because it probably will use a different extension for the same behaviour. So I need to add the extension for that too...

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#276

Post by cturner »

cat199 wrote: post #132
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28

> In the case of Wayland, the “vague authority” are a bunch of volunteers who have devoted tens of thousands of hours of their free time towards making free shit for you. That does not mean anyone is under an obligation to like it. > Maybe Wayland doesn’t work for your precious use-case. More likely, it does work, and you swallowed some propaganda based on an assumption which might have been correct 7 years ago. If y…

> In my admittedly somewhat distanced opinion, Wayland's biggest mistakes were not launching with a coherent strategy for replicating functionality like screen sharing, screenshots, and to a lesser extent remote desktop/applications. They just punted and said "that's a compositor problem!" as though that was supposed to make it ok. People have thus harbored some inherent resentment ever since. agree 1000% - really do…

Remote windowing is a legacy of the era when universities ran dozens of dumb terminals from a server. It would be bizarre to pursue that in an era of hardware-accelerated graphics.

If the Wayland design was weighed down by such things, it could never hope to be progress.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#278

Post by throwaways885 »

boudin wrote: post #237
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well yeah, i just got used to it working a certain way, now i gotta figure it out again. fucking nerds acting like it,s no big deal when shit i use every day is all changed up. do you have any idea how much cognitive load that is for the average user to figure out new ui? and usually for no good reason, just to change shit up so someone can get credit for a project. don,t blame the users for software being shit. it,s…

The reverse is also true. Don't blame people maintaining software for changing your routine. You make a lot of assumptions there but the reality is often much more nuanced. Everything changes, all the time, that's a rule that is true for absolutely everything in life.

And people wonder why Linux isn't popular outside of industry and hobbyists... Like, sure, maintainers can tell all their users to sod off, but don't be surprised when very few people are left around using your software, and especially don't get confused when companies refuse to invest in Linux ports.

All the successful projects Linux users like to talk about nowadays (gaming now a practical thing, new kernel features, Wine getting really good) were all bankrolled by massive billion dollar corps like Valve and Google, because the community itself has no discipline to see things through.

At least GNU of the old days was organised enough to know not to break people's workflows - just look at how stable coreutils have been - but GUI software for regular people somehow doesn't deserve to get the same treatment.

Re: I'm tired of this anti-Wayland horseshit

#279

Post by enriquto »

kuschku wrote: post #209
spijdar wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Professional pentester here - Wayland alone doesn't really do much for you, security wise. It is still very possible for an application simply running under a wayland compositor to do lots of nasty things. The Wayland protocol provides the building blocks for someone to create an Android-like sandboxed environment, but doing so would break every application. Snaps and Flatpak come closer, but still generally miss the…

> This is ... not true, either broadly or generally I’m saying that because if you ever type in your password, e.g. into a screenlocker, into a terminal with sudo, or an apt-get gui, every application can listen to those input events. Every application has the ability to be a keylogger by default. And with that captured password, it then can either inject input events into your terminal, or run sudo itself. > The Way…

> With X11, even a flatpak without any special permissions or bind mounts can still basically control your system. Just listen for input events until you see the keys "s u d o", then listen until you see something that looks like a password, then wait until the user is not paying attention, and inject virtual input events to start a terminal and inject input events to run "sudo rm -rf /*" with the password you captured earlier.

Why such complication? An hostile application can simply add an "evil" line to your .bashrc and you are fucked anyway. No need to keylog anything, nor the fancy stuff that you describe. It doesn't need to be a graphical application, even. The "ls" command can do it!

Post reply on HN