4 ms·

Exactly. Either use the proprietary driver for the GPU you bought, deal with the flaws in the FOSS reverse engineered driver, or get an AMD GPU since they actua

by ajvs 5y ago

Exactly. Either use the proprietary driver for the GPU you bought, deal with the flaws in the FOSS reverse engineered driver, or get an AMD GPU since they actually release their own legit FOSS driver.

StillBored 5y ago
Hey I get it, making shit work is hard. Its always more fun to do greenfield development on a new project. But basing the entire premise of that project on the faulty assumption that a certain set of GPU functions is stable and well supported across most of the devices in the field? That just shitty engineering. If nothing else the wayland guys could have created a llvmpipe style implementation 8+ years ago, so that wayland isn't a case of, does my hardware+drivers actually fit the narrow set of requirements to run this environment stably. Maybe simpleDRM will fix that, who knows. But what is apparent is that a significant portion of users, be they nivida users (and no the proprietary driver fedora wraps isn't better in this case, it just has different problems), users with the latest bleeding edge intel/amd hardware or users with slightly older hardware that wasn't part of the amdgpu test matrix, are being left to fend for themselves with X11. Ignoring that of course gnome is really the only thing that supported wayland until kwin started adding support. All the lightweight or non mainstream WM's are just running on X shims. So, almost 20 years later, https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html, (PS: don't click that directly from HN).
- emptysongglass 5y ago
  No, it's not making shit work is hard. It's Nvidia refusing to work with the broader community on a protocol everyone agreed on but them. X11 is abandonware and shouldn't be used. Red Hat has one guy keeping the lights on.
  - StillBored 5y ago
    Well, thanks redhat! But, if the state of graphics on linux is so bad, why are they spending their scarce resources writing an entirely new graphics stack rather than maintaining the one that works? This is IMHO the firefox/etc problems all over, instead of fixing user visible problems, while their market share plummeted they were creating an entirely new programming language to rewrite the browser in (something their competitors apparently didn't need to do). Result, eventually they can't afford to do either option because they ignored the fact that exactly 0% of their users cared about whether the browser was written in rust, or some limited subset of C++ that could be maintained. Also, if one looks at the graphics drivers in linux, there are dozens and dozens of them that aren't amdgpu, intel, or nvidia. How many of those actually work with wayland? I'm fairly certain it isn't many. PS: Also, if someone tries to participate, but is ignored, who is at fault? Much of the opensource community works by working to find near 100% consensus. Thats why it takes forever sometimes to get a solution. Yet, when nvidia does stick their toes into it, their contributions are ignored because "we know better", despite their market share? Doesn't sound like concensus, sounds like they got run over.
    - ajvs 5y ago
      > But, if the state of graphics on linux is so bad, why are they spending their scarce resources writing an entirely new graphics stack rather than maintaining the one that works? X11, being 37 years old has fundamental limitations in it's design that make it unsuitable for modern computing. There has been better ideas in the decades that followed that are incompatible with the X11 way of doing things. This is a discussion that has happened years ago, all that's needed is to perfect the implementation so that everyone can move onto it.
    - kaba0 5y ago
      It’s not even the wayland protocol in question, but a goddamn kernel API that nvidia used to refuse to implement. It just happens that wayland tries to use the.. linux graphics apis. The reason X works better with nvidia proprietary drivers is because you were using a hybrid proprietary X server in the first place.

by ajvs 5y ago

StillBored 5y ago

Hey I get it, making shit work is hard. Its always more fun to do greenfield development on a new project. But basing the entire premise of that project on the faulty assumption that a certain set of GPU functions is stable and well supported across most of the devices in the field? That just shitty engineering. If nothing else the wayland guys could have created a llvmpipe style implementation 8+ years ago, so that wayland isn't a case of, does my hardware+drivers actually fit the narrow set of requirements to run this environment stably. Maybe simpleDRM will fix that, who knows. But what is apparent is that a significant portion of users, be they nivida users (and no the proprietary driver fedora wraps isn't better in this case, it just has different problems), users with the latest bleeding edge intel/amd hardware or users with slightly older hardware that wasn't part of the amdgpu test matrix, are being left to fend for themselves with X11. Ignoring that of course gnome is really the only thing that supported wayland until kwin started adding support. All the lightweight or non mainstream WM's are just running on X shims. So, almost 20 years later, https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html, (PS: don't click that directly from HN).

emptysongglass 5y ago
No, it's not making shit work is hard. It's Nvidia refusing to work with the broader community on a protocol everyone agreed on but them. X11 is abandonware and shouldn't be used. Red Hat has one guy keeping the lights on.
- StillBored 5y ago
  Well, thanks redhat! But, if the state of graphics on linux is so bad, why are they spending their scarce resources writing an entirely new graphics stack rather than maintaining the one that works? This is IMHO the firefox/etc problems all over, instead of fixing user visible problems, while their market share plummeted they were creating an entirely new programming language to rewrite the browser in (something their competitors apparently didn't need to do). Result, eventually they can't afford to do either option because they ignored the fact that exactly 0% of their users cared about whether the browser was written in rust, or some limited subset of C++ that could be maintained. Also, if one looks at the graphics drivers in linux, there are dozens and dozens of them that aren't amdgpu, intel, or nvidia. How many of those actually work with wayland? I'm fairly certain it isn't many. PS: Also, if someone tries to participate, but is ignored, who is at fault? Much of the opensource community works by working to find near 100% consensus. Thats why it takes forever sometimes to get a solution. Yet, when nvidia does stick their toes into it, their contributions are ignored because "we know better", despite their market share? Doesn't sound like concensus, sounds like they got run over.
  - ajvs 5y ago
    > But, if the state of graphics on linux is so bad, why are they spending their scarce resources writing an entirely new graphics stack rather than maintaining the one that works? X11, being 37 years old has fundamental limitations in it's design that make it unsuitable for modern computing. There has been better ideas in the decades that followed that are incompatible with the X11 way of doing things. This is a discussion that has happened years ago, all that's needed is to perfect the implementation so that everyone can move onto it.
  - kaba0 5y ago
    It’s not even the wayland protocol in question, but a goddamn kernel API that nvidia used to refuse to implement. It just happens that wayland tries to use the.. linux graphics apis. The reason X works better with nvidia proprietary drivers is because you were using a hybrid proprietary X server in the first place.