2 ms·

I want to be clear about something. I don't care how those use cases get addressed. I do care very much about Unix remaining Unix. And the way X was implemente

I want to be clear about something. I don't care how those use cases get addressed. I do care very much about Unix remaining Unix. And the way X was implemented is multi-user graphical computing. That's got a lot of advantages and lot of use cases that people put to good use. X works works over the network because Unix does things over the network. X is multi-user, like Unix is multi-user. Same goes for multi-headed systems, multiple displays all kinds of user interface devices. You name it. The problem quite simply is the new development isn't unix-like in the way X was Unix like. The question is whether people will accept a lesser Unix then they know is currently possible.

thayne 6y ago
Afaik all of those things work fine with wayland, at least with wlroots. It is true that wayland isn't network transparent, but it can be used over the network with things like wayvnc and waypipe. Now you can say that those aren't really mature yet, and I would agree with you. I think wayland's readiness is often over-exagerated. However, I don't think any of the things you pointed out are compelling evudence that wayland isn't unix like. Otoh, I do think wayland departs from Unix in how it requires the "compositor" to perform to many roles. While in X, the compositor, window manager, etc. can be and often are seperarate processes from the x server, in wayland the compositor also needs to be the window manager, the keyboard layout manager, xwayland server, etc. And at least according some developers for a popular desktop environment, it is also the compositors responsibility to perform other tasks such as screen capture, vnc server, taskbar, lockscreen, etc. It isn't possible to do something like use i3 as the window manager for kde in wayland.
- ddingus 6y ago
  Your "not unix like" comments ring true, and similar ones have been brought up with systemd. My "I don't care how we get the use cases done" point of view applies to systems just as it does wayland. I don't care so much, so long as we preserve how robust UNIX is. Now to be fair, I think doing that gets a lot harder as these kinds of efforts continue, but the door is open. May end up in a good place. Personally, I wish all the current Wayland users and devs would experience an SGI X environment. Great experience. If, at the end of the day, stuff ends up working that good, few will complain.

thayne 6y ago

Afaik all of those things work fine with wayland, at least with wlroots. It is true that wayland isn't network transparent, but it can be used over the network with things like wayvnc and waypipe. Now you can say that those aren't really mature yet, and I would agree with you. I think wayland's readiness is often over-exagerated. However, I don't think any of the things you pointed out are compelling evudence that wayland isn't unix like. Otoh, I do think wayland departs from Unix in how it requires the "compositor" to perform to many roles. While in X, the compositor, window manager, etc. can be and often are seperarate processes from the x server, in wayland the compositor also needs to be the window manager, the keyboard layout manager, xwayland server, etc. And at least according some developers for a popular desktop environment, it is also the compositors responsibility to perform other tasks such as screen capture, vnc server, taskbar, lockscreen, etc. It isn't possible to do something like use i3 as the window manager for kde in wayland.

ddingus 6y ago
Your "not unix like" comments ring true, and similar ones have been brought up with systemd. My "I don't care how we get the use cases done" point of view applies to systems just as it does wayland. I don't care so much, so long as we preserve how robust UNIX is. Now to be fair, I think doing that gets a lot harder as these kinds of efforts continue, but the door is open. May end up in a good place. Personally, I wish all the current Wayland users and devs would experience an SGI X environment. Great experience. If, at the end of the day, stuff ends up working that good, few will complain.