31–40 of 228 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>i don't think it has a huge impact on the discussion here. but this is such a key difference versus X, that i think is hugely under-told: Wayland compositors all rely on lots of kernel facilities to do the job, where-as X is basically it's own kernel, has origins where it effectively was the device driver for the gpu, talking to it over pci, and doing just about everything. when people contrast wayland versus X as w…
The Xorg codebase still includes some of those old drivers and is structured to allow them to exist.
I've never used a system with Wayland (been on i3 for ~15 years) but every time a project like this comes up, I have to wonder why Wayland is even a thing. So many hoops to jump through for things that should be simple. Sure, X11 has warts but I can make it do basically anything I want. Wayland seems like it will always have too much friction to ever consider switching.
> I can make it do basically anything I want X11 can't do high refresh rates every time that I've tried to do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Xorg codebase still includes some of those old drivers and is structured to allow them to exist.
Yes exactly. DRM exists, but there's still what I called the X "kernel", all of it's heavyweight abstractions. To the previous a-hole, frak you: not an AI. That's rude as frak. Also, you manage to be incredibly wrong. Even an AI wouldn't overlook such an obvious error; maybe it'd be better to have it replace you. So rude dude! Behave!
The fact that Wayland can't just substitute out pluggable WMs without changing a bunch of other unrelated infrastructure is IMO one of the biggest user-facing losses relative to X11. Anybody who is working to improve that is doing god's work as they say.
[flagged]
Wayland in general had a rather cavalier approach to doing away with things that X users take for granted, like, well, making screenshots. Eventually, under pressure, those in charge agreed that these features are actually very important for real users, so implementations appeared. It's an understandable way to discover the minimal usable subset of features, but the process of it is a bit frustrating for the early adopters.
[flagged]
The fact that Wayland can't just substitute out pluggable WMs without changing a bunch of other unrelated infrastructure is IMO one of the biggest user-facing losses relative to X11. Anybody who is working to improve that is doing god's work as they say.
[flagged]
The fact that Wayland can't just substitute out pluggable WMs without changing a bunch of other unrelated infrastructure is IMO one of the biggest user-facing losses relative to X11. Anybody who is working to improve that is doing god's work as they say.
You only need a single implementation that exposes an API for running a WM as an extension. I don't really get why would it be a good idea to somehow mandate a specific architecture design from the standard.