6 ms·

The question is what is native support for Wayland? Wayland Compositors are so fragmented how could they possibly support the multitude of environments?

izacus 4y ago
It's addressed towards the end of the article.
- sprash 4y ago
  - qwery 4y ago
    Which part exactly? It sounds to me like getting blender running on wayland wasn't that hard and is in a good enough state to be considered for inclusion in the next release.
    - sprash 4y ago
      It's still not running properly and obviously requires many workarounds for problems known for years. So, Which part? every part. If thier customers demand Wayland support they have to do it I guess. To me it seems like a huge waste of everybody's time. Wayland offers zero advatages over existing solutions.
      - timinou 4y ago
        Wayland's biggest disadvantage is that I can't use my computer as a heater anymore. With X11, I had that feature everytime I would try connecting a second screen to my HiDPI laptop. Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. X11 survives because of legacy and inertia, and I haven't looked back one second since the ~3 years I made the switch to Wayland/Sway.
        capableweb 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure Firefox doesn't work properly out of the box with Wayland, together with Spotify, Discord, VS Code and tons of other applications. I'm a Blender user too, and this submission is good news, but before that, Blender was in this box too. I migrated to Wayland just last week but having to add fixes to various applications I use day-to-day (every one I mentioned except VS Code) kind of sucks and is not needed at all with Xorg. But the performance is so much better and also lower memory usage, that I power through it. But I can understand why people are resisting Wayland, it seems it's very early still as not a lot of what I use supports it fully.
        alxlaz 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. If you think Wayland is stable and a joy to configure today, you would've loved XFree86 around 2002 or so!
        HansHamster 4y ago
        > It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. X11 survives because of legacy and inertia, and I haven't looked back one second since the ~3 years I made the switch to Wayland/Sway. Good for you, but I had the completely opposite experience. X11 just works for me without any serious issues, but the last time I tried Wayland a few months ago (on RDNA2) it was an unstable mess. Play a video with mpv? That's a crash. Firefox and some other applications I don't remember also had weird issues. And Gnome seemed to be the only desktop that was somewhat usable (except for all the crashes...). KDE still felt quite incomplete and others would not run at all (Hikari just made my screens flicker). There are a few things that really make me want to switch, but in the end I always end up back with X11.
        favadi 4y ago
        Wayland still doesn't work well with my NVIDIA graphic card. At this point, I'm not sure how many years until it is fully supported.
        yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. That's fair, but you need to understand that the "haters" have the exact reverse position; X11 has been stable to use and a joy to configure, and Wayland remains full of "interesting" pitfalls. (If this is going to be that kind of thread: My personal irritation is that there's no consistent way to set keyboard/mouse layouts that works across compositors, or in many cases at all, because every single compositor does its own thing.)
      - kaba0 4y ago
        Every additional feature requires workarounds. Also, if you wouldn’t be full of it you could actually list some concrete problem perhaps, you know, to make a useful contribution to the discussion?
dale_glass 4y ago
Wayland is a protocol that at least in theory should be implemented very similarly by all available compositors. Of course in practice there will be differences, but they shouldn't be large.
- samus 4y ago
  The idea about a standard is that all implementors adhere to it, except for very good reasons. Style and proprietary features are not covered for example. Compositors could also differ in which extensions they support. But the core behavior should be the same and applications should not have to care.
- yxhuvud 4y ago
  The problem is that you can't realistically do anything with just the base protocol. Everything relevant beyond setting up buffers and surfaces happen in extensions.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    Unfortunately I've run into this a lot on modern machines. I wanted to port some of my GTK apps over to Wayland, but I can't easily do that since non-GNOME Wayland desktops don't render it properly. The fragmentation in Wayland implementations is real, and can hurt you.

izacus 4y ago

It's addressed towards the end of the article.

sprash 4y ago
- qwery 4y ago
  Which part exactly? It sounds to me like getting blender running on wayland wasn't that hard and is in a good enough state to be considered for inclusion in the next release.
  - sprash 4y ago
    It's still not running properly and obviously requires many workarounds for problems known for years. So, Which part? every part. If thier customers demand Wayland support they have to do it I guess. To me it seems like a huge waste of everybody's time. Wayland offers zero advatages over existing solutions.
    - timinou 4y ago
      Wayland's biggest disadvantage is that I can't use my computer as a heater anymore. With X11, I had that feature everytime I would try connecting a second screen to my HiDPI laptop. Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. X11 survives because of legacy and inertia, and I haven't looked back one second since the ~3 years I made the switch to Wayland/Sway.
      - capableweb 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure Firefox doesn't work properly out of the box with Wayland, together with Spotify, Discord, VS Code and tons of other applications. I'm a Blender user too, and this submission is good news, but before that, Blender was in this box too. I migrated to Wayland just last week but having to add fixes to various applications I use day-to-day (every one I mentioned except VS Code) kind of sucks and is not needed at all with Xorg. But the performance is so much better and also lower memory usage, that I power through it. But I can understand why people are resisting Wayland, it seems it's very early still as not a lot of what I use supports it fully.
      - alxlaz 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. If you think Wayland is stable and a joy to configure today, you would've loved XFree86 around 2002 or so!
      - HansHamster 4y ago
        > It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. X11 survives because of legacy and inertia, and I haven't looked back one second since the ~3 years I made the switch to Wayland/Sway. Good for you, but I had the completely opposite experience. X11 just works for me without any serious issues, but the last time I tried Wayland a few months ago (on RDNA2) it was an unstable mess. Play a video with mpv? That's a crash. Firefox and some other applications I don't remember also had weird issues. And Gnome seemed to be the only desktop that was somewhat usable (except for all the crashes...). KDE still felt quite incomplete and others would not run at all (Hikari just made my screens flicker). There are a few things that really make me want to switch, but in the end I always end up back with X11.
      - favadi 4y ago
        Wayland still doesn't work well with my NVIDIA graphic card. At this point, I'm not sure how many years until it is fully supported.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
        > Honestly though I don't get the Wayland hate. It's been stable to use and a joy to configure. That's fair, but you need to understand that the "haters" have the exact reverse position; X11 has been stable to use and a joy to configure, and Wayland remains full of "interesting" pitfalls. (If this is going to be that kind of thread: My personal irritation is that there's no consistent way to set keyboard/mouse layouts that works across compositors, or in many cases at all, because every single compositor does its own thing.)
    - kaba0 4y ago
      Every additional feature requires workarounds. Also, if you wouldn’t be full of it you could actually list some concrete problem perhaps, you know, to make a useful contribution to the discussion?

dale_glass 4y ago

Wayland is a protocol that at least in theory should be implemented very similarly by all available compositors. Of course in practice there will be differences, but they shouldn't be large.

samus 4y ago
The idea about a standard is that all implementors adhere to it, except for very good reasons. Style and proprietary features are not covered for example. Compositors could also differ in which extensions they support. But the core behavior should be the same and applications should not have to care.
yxhuvud 4y ago
The problem is that you can't realistically do anything with just the base protocol. Everything relevant beyond setting up buffers and surfaces happen in extensions.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Unfortunately I've run into this a lot on modern machines. I wanted to port some of my GTK apps over to Wayland, but I can't easily do that since non-GNOME Wayland desktops don't render it properly. The fragmentation in Wayland implementations is real, and can hurt you.