71–80 of 339 posts
Isn't the switch from X11 to Wayland the most painful switch that happened in the linux world ? Even going from python 2 to 3 was not as bad
Then we'll make Wayland 2.
Isn't the switch from X11 to Wayland the most painful switch that happened in the linux world ? Even going from python 2 to 3 was not as bad
>The goal is, that xfwl4 will offer the same functionality and behavior as xfwm4 does... I wonder how strictly they interpret behavior here given the architectural divergence? As an example, focus-stealing prevention. In xfwm4 (and x11 generally), this requires complex heuristics and timestamp checks because x11 clients are powerful and can aggressively grab focus. In wayland, the compositor is the sole arbiter of fo…
Naturally these kinds of having a language island create some attrition regarding build tooling, integration with existing ecosystem and who is able to contribute to what.
So lets see how it evolves, even with my C bashing, I was a much happier XFCE user than with GNOME and GJS all over the place.
I started off using twm / olwm / vtwm in 1991. Then FVWM and Afterstep / WindowMaker. I've been using XFCE since around 2007. As long as it functions similarly I'll be happy.
GNOME was cool during the sawfish days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does Wayland "feel like the future?" It feels like a regression to me and a lot of other people who have run into serious usability problems. At best, it seems like a huge diversion of time and resources, given that we already had a working GUI. (Maybe that was the intention.) The arguments for it have boiled down to "yuck code older than me" from supposed professionals employed by commercial Linux vendors to sup…
Because X is not getting much development at this point (personally I still use i3, haven’t switched to Sway, the present works fine for me).
The OpenBSD people are still working on Xenocara, and it introduces actual security via pledge system calls.
I love XFCE, with the move to wayland I hope they start thinking about abandoning GTK though
Why do you hope they abandon GTK? What would you have them replace it with?
If they ever move away from GTK (due to the GNOME shenanigans GNOME-izing GTK) I wish Englightenment and Xfce were together a single thing. But that's if I could ask the Tux genie three wishes.
I hope that XFCE remains a solid lightweight desktop option. I've become a huge fan of KDE over the past couple of years, but it certainly isn't what you would consider lightweight or minimal. Personally, I'm a big proponent of Wayland and not big Rust detractor, so I don't see any problem with this. I do, however, wonder how many long-time XFCE fans and the folks who donated the money funding this will feel about it…
Does Wayland work on non-Linux systems (e.g. *BSD)? If an application is written for Wayland, is there a way to send its windows to (e.g.) my Mac, like I can with X11 to XQuartz?
It depends on what you mean by send. Wayland doesn't have network transparency, there's a bit of a song and dance you have to do to get that working properly. I'm not sure the state of that or of Wayland compositors in general on Mac.
Currently I can:
$ ssh -X somehost xeyes
So will it be renamed to Wfce in the end?
>The goal is, that xfwl4 will offer the same functionality and behavior as xfwm4 does... I wonder how strictly they interpret behavior here given the architectural divergence? As an example, focus-stealing prevention. In xfwm4 (and x11 generally), this requires complex heuristics and timestamp checks because x11 clients are powerful and can aggressively grab focus. In wayland, the compositor is the sole arbiter of fo…
> Can the compositor replicate the input-to-pixel latency of uncomposited x11 on low-end devices or is that a class of performance we just have to sacrifice for the frame-perfect rendering of wayland? well, the answer is just no, wayland has been consistently slower than X11 and nothing running on top can't really go around that