451–460 of 462 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> most of the Wayland complaints you read are handwave-y bullshit, idk what else to say. The dislike of the product among users is certainly sincere. I feel like somewhere there is probably an author of a young adult novel with a title like “He’s Just Not That Into You” with a cathartic and cautionary ending and that author should write a pamphlet or something specifically for the benefit of the Wayland people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
OK, you can't have your preferred environment because someone else has a different use-case. Moreover, people will condescend to you and insist your setup never worked, nobody ever used it, and nobody cares that it's going away. Plus, they state that you are just being difficult, if not delusional, when you say that you are quite happy with how things are. I mean, your way never worked, so how could it have been your…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny, the other day I started writing an X server of my own. While I appreciate and welcome this work, I still use and write software that makes use of old X draw calls, which I intended to incorporate into my server, unlike the author of this work. So I'm glad to see my efforts have not been made largely redundant!
Is it written in C? If it is and you open-sourced it, someone might port it to Plan 9.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The -IMO- important part of that quote is "NOT HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO KEEP UP WITH wlroots CHANGES". X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. wlroots seemingly isn't. This is a significant issue when it comes to relying on most 3rd party libraries.
> X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. That's certainly one way to say "no longer developed".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know how to get the audio stream names, the problem is the window titles. With X it's easy, just call xdotool. I'm sure it's probably easy enough on Windows and MacOS too. Wayland is the weird one for making focused window titles privileged information. Anyway, I do think I've created what should be considered basic desktop functionality here, a simple hotkey that mutes or otherwise changes the volume only of the f…
Wayland is approximately correct in this case and Windows and Mac are behind the security curve for bincompat reasons; window titles certainly leak PII. There should be a way to do it, but it is sensitive information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tech is full of examples of 'successor' technologies, that were aiming to provide a clean rewrite without legacy, which then got bogged down with supporting a bunch of corner cases and accumulated their own share of cruft and could be no longer be considered a cleaner alternative. All the while the majority of the userbase being stuck on the old platform because the new one is buggy and doesn't offer anything tangibl…
Wayland and its various implementations like KDE plasma are 90% ready. Now they just need the other 90% to move from alpha to product . I expect it'll take another decade or two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure what you saw, but on regular Linux processes of the user can spy on each other anyway. In any case, X had the concept of untrusted clients basically forever but nobody cared to invest even the small amount of work necessary to make it work well because nobody thought it would make a different. That this was later used as a major argument against X convinced me that this is not at all about technology.
Yeah, but with how we’re moving towards running each (desktop) application in its own cgroup, thus restricting what syscalls any given application can do, soon any old user process will no longer be able to read any other process’s memory. I don’t believe that the argument about how we need not patch a hole because another one exists right besides it is sound.
It is when you are essentially putting bars in front of your windows while leaving the front door unlocked, i.e. you are making things worse in the name of security while not actually providing any additional security.
> Yeah, but with how we’re moving towards running each (desktop) application in its own cgroup, thus restricting what syscalls any given application can do
Who is we? I don't want or need any of that on my free software system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the issues are trivially resolved, why did the authors of X decided to abandon X? They convinced their employers Wayland would be better? > Xscreensaver/lock screens on Qubes are still broken. Most people aren't nation-state-level targets and don't worry about security to that degree. But they do like global hotkeys.
What employers? Also, this level of security is wanted even on a "I don't want my sister to look at my stuff" level, no need to go nation-state level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the issues are trivially resolved, why did the authors of X decided to abandon X? They convinced their employers Wayland would be better? > Xscreensaver/lock screens on Qubes are still broken. Most people aren't nation-state-level targets and don't worry about security to that degree. But they do like global hotkeys.
By now I am not sure if these posts can stil be given the benefit of the doubt or are just dishonest. Who were the developers pushing wayland because of their employers? Kristian Høgsberg (who was a significant xorg developer, because people always deny that wayland was written by xorg guys) originally developed wayland in his free time, it then became a freedesktop project (I would argue not a group run by corporate…
Then you'd be wrong. Freedesktop is essentially RedHat and friends.