3 ms·

> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is p

> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% of things anyone wants to do with a computer. It's not a square wheel at all. This had me thinking about digital NIMBYism. Suggest others do one thing, while you do the opposite, because your reasons make sense. You still haven't addressed PCSX2's, or anyone else's, concrete reasons.

caslon 3y ago
I use X11 because I wrote a terrible usermode hack a decade ago for a niche (<2000 units) piece of hardware that gives incorrect EDID information and needs a handshake to turn itself on, and haven't tried to port my hack to the post-kms world yet. It is the definition of a legacy hack, and one I'm hoping to rid my systems of the second I get a decent vacation. I've used Wayland before; it's great. Most people aren't gamers; everything PCSX2 wants to do is something that 99% of people do not care about; for the majority non-gamer software, allowing a window to manage absolute position is pointless, or even bad. Apps shouldn't be able to force CSD if the user doesn't want it; GNOME is respecting user preference (and that's not a Wayland thing). Even so, it still works with XWayland. For Wayland users, there is no service disruption. Aside from people who dislike XWayland, anyway. Proprietary NVIDIA drivers being broken is an NVIDIA thing. Swapchains causing segfaults happened any time you used direct rendering from like 470 to 525, even on X11. They don't make great Linux drivers.