4 ms·
What's your point, though? Seems nit-picky.
by nsajko 3y ago
What's your point, though? Seems nit-picky.
- seba_dos1 3y agoWayland is not a display server and there's no such thing as "the Wayland display server". It's a protocol that's used between clients and display servers ("compositors" in Wayland parlance). Various projects build their own Wayland compositors, as opposed to X11 world where even though there were several implementations of X11 servers, pretty much everyone has used Xorg for many years now. Part of the X11 protocol was that window managers were separated from display server; most Wayland servers don't separate those though, so usually you end up with Wayland compositor provided by DE you use. Most Wayland servers also support X11, by the way (usually through XWayland, which is part of Xorg).
- PlutoIsAPlanet 3y agoThere’s nothing really stopping a wayland compositor from having and supporting a separate window manager, it’s just easier to not have it separate. Window managers is a Xism that some DEs brought into the Wayland world (e.g kde) where some have not (e.g gnome). It’s worth noting that a Wayland display server has to implement far less than an X server and as the article mentions there are things like wlroots that do a large chunk of it for you.
- seba_dos1 3y ago> There’s nothing really stopping a wayland compositor from having and supporting a separate window manager, it’s just easier to not have it separate. That's why I said "most" and "usually". That said, while it's certainly possible, I haven't seen any implementation that did it yet. > Window managers is a Xism that some DEs brought into the Wayland world (e.g kde) KDE does not separate its window manager from its compositor (KWin) at all. What it separates is its shell (Plasma). In the GNOME world, mobile shell (phosh) and phoc are separated in similar way.