3 ms·

It's a weird strawman to say that Wayland's problem is that it's not a 1:1 replacement for Xorg. I don't think the author understands what Wayland is or what it

by DCKing 4y ago

It's a weird strawman to say that Wayland's problem is that it's not a 1:1 replacement for Xorg. I don't think the author understands what Wayland is or what it intends to do, and it's sad that they didn't let that stop them from writing such a piece with incendiary language like this. Wayland isn't a complete replacement of Xorg and has never been intended to be one. Nobody with close knowledge of the project has ever pretended it has - that premise just appears in severe oversimplifications and strawmen. Wayland is just a part of a rethink of how Linux desktop architecture works, together with Freedesktop standards for things like screen casting or window control [1]. The state of complete implementations of those Freedesktop standards - as well as application support - to the point it can replace a lot of X11 is pretty lacking for sure [2]. But that's just unfortunately just what you get when trying to establish such a new architecture in an underfunded and undirected community like the Linux desktop community. No need to "boycott" anything - just use whatever you like on Linux, like you always have. [1]: E.g. contrary to what many people seem to understand, lacking screencasting support is not actually due to faults in """Wayland""", rather apps and desktops not properly supporting a wholly different Freedesktop standard made to work on Wayland compositors and X11 desktops alike (not dependent on any display protocol at all!). Screencasting on macOS, Windows and Wayland is not the display server's job, it's just one of the many things added to the kitchen sink that has become Xorg. [2]: In fairness, it covers enough that it's working for a lot of people's workflows. It should work for way more people though, and I hope we get there.

smoldesu 4y ago
> Wayland is just a part of a rethink of how Linux desktop architecture works, together with Freedesktop standards for things like screen casting or window control. Well, that's part of the problem: I think the consensus is that a lot of these solutions are bunk. Wayland doesn't feel like something you'd build a desktop with, it feels like a software API for digital signage or maybe something for an iPad-like UI. This is cool, but shoehorning it into a desktop is a bad idea. The entire desktop space has moved on, Wayland is comparatively low-tech at this point. Quartz is a good example of this. Not only is it more secure than Wayland, it supports features like app indicators and global menus controls. That's a problem. An even bigger problem is that Mutter, the official Wayland implementation, exists exclusively to support GNOME. Other desktop developers are not welcome, instead they're tossed wlroots and told to make do. Developmentally, I think Wayland is a trainwreck. If it is a "rethink", then it should have been used to design a tablet OS instead of a desktop OS that runs desktop software and supposedly supports legacy features/apps. If you disagree, then maybe you'd enjoy Windows 8, which is a similarly brave reimagining of the future of the desktop.
- DCKing 4y ago
  It's fair to point out problems in the general project and philosophy, but I think that's a different conversation. The discussion at hand points to general compatibility problems that have never been promised. Even if Wayland had been a different project with the properties you desire (which at face value seem fair enough), that still wouldn't have delivered anything like the strawman 1:1 Xorg compatibility this blog talks about, nor would it likely have overcome the general messiness and lack of direction on the Linux desktop that's keeping both X11 and non-X11 desktops back.
- amarshall 4y ago
  Mutter is not the “official Wayland implementation”. Wayland has one reference implementation: Weston https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston
- kaba0 4y ago
  And app-indicators, global menu controls can all be implemented as new wayland protocols and after they get accepted by the majority those can appear reliably everywhere (instead of only in Unity, remember?) And I fail to see your point, you are mixing up wayland’s tasks quite a bit here. It is pretty similar to Quartz, in that it is also a compositor (as is every other OS’s display manager by the way, it is time for Linux to also get there)
josephcsible 4y ago
> Wayland isn't a complete replacment of Xorg and has never intended to be. Red Hat seems to disagree: > The X.org display server is deprecated, and will be removed in a future major RHEL release. The default desktop session is now the Wayland session in most cases. https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/9/html-single/9.0_release_notes/index https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...
- DCKing 4y ago
  Red Hat is certainly replacing something, but I need some help to see the implication that Wayland the display protocol is a complete replacement for X11 in that snippet. Part of the problem in the conversation, as I state in the sentence after the one you quote, is severe oversimplifications in how people - including Red Hat seemingly - talk about this.
- amarshall 4y ago
  That statement is very far from claiming it’s a “complete replacement”. It says “that is going away, use this now”.
- diffeomorphism 4y ago
  No, that does not say what you think it does. Nowhere does it say "complete" or "1:1", which is the point. Wayland is supposed to be different/better and that includes dropping some stuff and increasing security (e.g. screen recording or automation tools).
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    If X11 is going away without there being something to replace all of its use cases, then what are people supposed to do who need those automation tools, etc.?
    - diffeomorphism 4y ago
      Current Red Hat release have still like 15(?) years of support, so no rush. Otherwise the same thing as usual: pay someone to build actually secure automation tools. The way X does these is horribly insecure and broken by design, so wayland rightfully says they won't support doing it that way. Nothing about not doing these ever. Same for screen recording by the way. "Any app can see everything with absolutely no security"=not supported anymore. "Any app can use this standard way to ask for permission to record"=new. Obviously that breaks older software, but that is on purpose. So you had a transition period where for instance OBS did not work on wayland, then it was updated and now it does.

by DCKing 4y ago

smoldesu 4y ago

> Wayland is just a part of a rethink of how Linux desktop architecture works, together with Freedesktop standards for things like screen casting or window control. Well, that's part of the problem: I think the consensus is that a lot of these solutions are bunk. Wayland doesn't feel like something you'd build a desktop with, it feels like a software API for digital signage or maybe something for an iPad-like UI. This is cool, but shoehorning it into a desktop is a bad idea. The entire desktop space has moved on, Wayland is comparatively low-tech at this point. Quartz is a good example of this. Not only is it more secure than Wayland, it supports features like app indicators and global menus controls. That's a problem. An even bigger problem is that Mutter, the official Wayland implementation, exists exclusively to support GNOME. Other desktop developers are not welcome, instead they're tossed wlroots and told to make do. Developmentally, I think Wayland is a trainwreck. If it is a "rethink", then it should have been used to design a tablet OS instead of a desktop OS that runs desktop software and supposedly supports legacy features/apps. If you disagree, then maybe you'd enjoy Windows 8, which is a similarly brave reimagining of the future of the desktop.

DCKing 4y ago
It's fair to point out problems in the general project and philosophy, but I think that's a different conversation. The discussion at hand points to general compatibility problems that have never been promised. Even if Wayland had been a different project with the properties you desire (which at face value seem fair enough), that still wouldn't have delivered anything like the strawman 1:1 Xorg compatibility this blog talks about, nor would it likely have overcome the general messiness and lack of direction on the Linux desktop that's keeping both X11 and non-X11 desktops back.
amarshall 4y ago
Mutter is not the “official Wayland implementation”. Wayland has one reference implementation: Weston https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston
kaba0 4y ago
And app-indicators, global menu controls can all be implemented as new wayland protocols and after they get accepted by the majority those can appear reliably everywhere (instead of only in Unity, remember?) And I fail to see your point, you are mixing up wayland’s tasks quite a bit here. It is pretty similar to Quartz, in that it is also a compositor (as is every other OS’s display manager by the way, it is time for Linux to also get there)

josephcsible 4y ago

> Wayland isn't a complete replacment of Xorg and has never intended to be. Red Hat seems to disagree: > The X.org display server is deprecated, and will be removed in a future major RHEL release. The default desktop session is now the Wayland session in most cases. https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/9/html-single/9.0_release_notes/index https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

DCKing 4y ago
Red Hat is certainly replacing something, but I need some help to see the implication that Wayland the display protocol is a complete replacement for X11 in that snippet. Part of the problem in the conversation, as I state in the sentence after the one you quote, is severe oversimplifications in how people - including Red Hat seemingly - talk about this.
amarshall 4y ago
That statement is very far from claiming it’s a “complete replacement”. It says “that is going away, use this now”.
diffeomorphism 4y ago
No, that does not say what you think it does. Nowhere does it say "complete" or "1:1", which is the point. Wayland is supposed to be different/better and that includes dropping some stuff and increasing security (e.g. screen recording or automation tools).
- josephcsible 4y ago
  If X11 is going away without there being something to replace all of its use cases, then what are people supposed to do who need those automation tools, etc.?
  - diffeomorphism 4y ago
    Current Red Hat release have still like 15(?) years of support, so no rush. Otherwise the same thing as usual: pay someone to build actually secure automation tools. The way X does these is horribly insecure and broken by design, so wayland rightfully says they won't support doing it that way. Nothing about not doing these ever. Same for screen recording by the way. "Any app can see everything with absolutely no security"=not supported anymore. "Any app can use this standard way to ask for permission to record"=new. Obviously that breaks older software, but that is on purpose. So you had a transition period where for instance OBS did not work on wayland, then it was updated and now it does.