4 ms·

> (seemingly everything, nothing is ever Wayland's fault or responsibility) That's because there is no such thing as "wayland" actually running on your machin

> (seemingly everything, nothing is ever Wayland's fault or responsibility) That's because there is no such thing as "wayland" actually running on your machine -- it's simply a protocol for compositors and applications to talk to each other.

intergalplan 6y ago
> That's because there is no such thing as "wayland" actually running on your machine -- it's simply a protocol for compositors and applications to talk to each other. "Wayland" is also an implementation. The protocol and implementation share a name. By the look of things, Gnome does indeed require it (that is, various "libwayland" packages) on Ubuntu.
- CrazyPyroLinux 6y ago
  (I'm not the one who downvoted you, so have an upvote, but) I think they renamed their reference implementation to "Weston" to differentiate it from the Wayland spec/interface. Gnome implements its own, as does KDE, as does Sway. But I'm a simple person, and in my eyes even bare Weston is "good enough" in that "startx" sort of way...
  - intergalplan 6y ago
    They have a compositor named Weston, yes, but then what is libwayland, on which Gnome (and others) depend? Wikipedia: > Wayland is a communication protocol that specifies the communication between a display server and its clients, as well as a C library implementation of that protocol. That's the C library also named Wayland and made by the people guiding the Wayland spec on which Gnome depends, no? Or are there three things going by the name Wayland, one of them not actually associated with the Wayland project?
    - Quekid5 5y ago
      They could have perhaps done better to differentiate All The Things, but libwayland is just a C implementation of speaking the Wayland protocol...? AFAIUI, e.g. KDE doesn't actually use any of that. (I could be wrong, I honestly don't care that much about the minutiae.)
simion314 6y ago
You could blame the architecture on Wayland. But I am sure in 15 years when Wayland(implementations) will have similar features and stability as Xorg it will be obsolete. I have the feeling that Wayland architecture is like it is because of incompetence and moving the problems into extensions and implementations.

intergalplan 6y ago

> That's because there is no such thing as "wayland" actually running on your machine -- it's simply a protocol for compositors and applications to talk to each other. "Wayland" is also an implementation. The protocol and implementation share a name. By the look of things, Gnome does indeed require it (that is, various "libwayland" packages) on Ubuntu.

CrazyPyroLinux 6y ago
(I'm not the one who downvoted you, so have an upvote, but) I think they renamed their reference implementation to "Weston" to differentiate it from the Wayland spec/interface. Gnome implements its own, as does KDE, as does Sway. But I'm a simple person, and in my eyes even bare Weston is "good enough" in that "startx" sort of way...
- intergalplan 6y ago
  They have a compositor named Weston, yes, but then what is libwayland, on which Gnome (and others) depend? Wikipedia: > Wayland is a communication protocol that specifies the communication between a display server and its clients, as well as a C library implementation of that protocol. That's the C library also named Wayland and made by the people guiding the Wayland spec on which Gnome depends, no? Or are there three things going by the name Wayland, one of them not actually associated with the Wayland project?
  - Quekid5 5y ago
    They could have perhaps done better to differentiate All The Things, but libwayland is just a C implementation of speaking the Wayland protocol...? AFAIUI, e.g. KDE doesn't actually use any of that. (I could be wrong, I honestly don't care that much about the minutiae.)

simion314 6y ago

You could blame the architecture on Wayland. But I am sure in 15 years when Wayland(implementations) will have similar features and stability as Xorg it will be obsolete. I have the feeling that Wayland architecture is like it is because of incompetence and moving the problems into extensions and implementations.