4 ms·

You will be miserable and waiting forever because what you want is impossible for all practical purposes. Feature parity is a red herring when some newer featur

You will be miserable and waiting forever because what you want is impossible for all practical purposes. Feature parity is a red herring when some newer features just can't be done properly on X. The "xorg ideology" is to basically not have security on anything and to consider GPUs to be an afterthought, as stated by a parent comment. From a user perspective, this situation is untenable and yet will never actually improve because doing so would break the protocol and all the clients. I've spoken to some of the other DE developers and pretty much all of them have said to me the only reason they don't want to move away from X is because they lack the manpower to do it. Also, the reason there's no "politics" anymore is because most of the developers have moved on to Wayland. There were quite a few flame wars on the X mailing lists back in the day. You can probably blame some of that for the existence of Wayland, which should actually have less politics because multiple groups are no longer fighting for what to put in the one centralized X server. The one area where there was activity, and arguments were popping up again was... you guessed it, Xwayland, but they solved that by bring it into its own release cycle away from the rest.

rbreaves 5y ago
The “security” of wayland is a bit of an illusion imo. I’ve already seen a user pick it apart awhile ago. Regardless I don’t what they’re trying to do, but they do need to add in a proper method for granting higher privileges to apps to have more access to Wayland in the same way macOS grants access to Remote Desktop apps.
- throwaway82652 5y ago
  No, you haven't. I'm fairly certain I know a blog article you're referring to and that article is a load of nonsense. I can debunk any claims you might remember. The security isn't an illusion, it was designed to fix very real and known problems that exist in X11 and likely won't ever get patched out from X11. At least in GNOME and KDE, there is a proper method for granting higher privileges, that method is the xdg portal API. I don't know where people are getting this idea that the method doesn't exist, it has existed for quite some time now.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    > I can debunk any claims you might remember. Listen, I don't care who you are or what your agenda is, but a line like this just confirms my suspicions that you're trolling. Quit it, please. Your constant bickering with anyone who disagrees with you is undermining the site's values of gratifying intellectual curiosity. It kills fruitful conversations, makes it harder to take your arguments in good faith, and colors your stance as simply contrarianism. I'm going to continue ignoring your comments if this is the basis of your conversation on this site.
    - throwaway82652 5y ago
      My agenda is to explain how this stuff works to stimulate intellectual curiosity. That's literally all there is to it. I've seen a number of wrong claims posted about this in the past, if you can remember any of the claims I'll address them directly and we can have a fruitful conversation about it. If you feel that examining past claims under a critical light is "trolling" and "kills fruitful conversations" then I don't know why you're even bothering to discuss this, please just let me address the claims made by the other commenter. Feel free to ignore me.
- kaba0 5y ago
  Proper security is layered. Wayland is like a steel-framed door, while X is like having a hole for the door. Of course not even the steel door worth anything if you don’t have windows in place, but you can’t even begin to secure your place without a door. X simply can’t separate different applications inputs and display outputs, unless you go full on nested X servers, while wayland solves this aspect splendidly. Of course it is only a single step into the correct direction, you still need sandboxing and the like, but just sandboxing wouldn’t have been enough for X.

rbreaves 5y ago

The “security” of wayland is a bit of an illusion imo. I’ve already seen a user pick it apart awhile ago. Regardless I don’t what they’re trying to do, but they do need to add in a proper method for granting higher privileges to apps to have more access to Wayland in the same way macOS grants access to Remote Desktop apps.

throwaway82652 5y ago
No, you haven't. I'm fairly certain I know a blog article you're referring to and that article is a load of nonsense. I can debunk any claims you might remember. The security isn't an illusion, it was designed to fix very real and known problems that exist in X11 and likely won't ever get patched out from X11. At least in GNOME and KDE, there is a proper method for granting higher privileges, that method is the xdg portal API. I don't know where people are getting this idea that the method doesn't exist, it has existed for quite some time now.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  > I can debunk any claims you might remember. Listen, I don't care who you are or what your agenda is, but a line like this just confirms my suspicions that you're trolling. Quit it, please. Your constant bickering with anyone who disagrees with you is undermining the site's values of gratifying intellectual curiosity. It kills fruitful conversations, makes it harder to take your arguments in good faith, and colors your stance as simply contrarianism. I'm going to continue ignoring your comments if this is the basis of your conversation on this site.
  - throwaway82652 5y ago
    My agenda is to explain how this stuff works to stimulate intellectual curiosity. That's literally all there is to it. I've seen a number of wrong claims posted about this in the past, if you can remember any of the claims I'll address them directly and we can have a fruitful conversation about it. If you feel that examining past claims under a critical light is "trolling" and "kills fruitful conversations" then I don't know why you're even bothering to discuss this, please just let me address the claims made by the other commenter. Feel free to ignore me.
kaba0 5y ago
Proper security is layered. Wayland is like a steel-framed door, while X is like having a hole for the door. Of course not even the steel door worth anything if you don’t have windows in place, but you can’t even begin to secure your place without a door. X simply can’t separate different applications inputs and display outputs, unless you go full on nested X servers, while wayland solves this aspect splendidly. Of course it is only a single step into the correct direction, you still need sandboxing and the like, but just sandboxing wouldn’t have been enough for X.