20 ms·

The thing that concerns me right now is the availability of clients supporting remote desktops of Wayland. As far as I've found, 'compatability with Wayland' me

• jeroenhd 3y ago
  Teamviewer seems to work, but it's pretty unstable. The APIs are all there now, but of the limited number of Linux compatible remote desktop applications, even fewer seem to be interested in adding Wayland support. Rustdesk has Wayland support, but that project has all kinds of weird code smells. Hopefully other projects will take inspiration and implement Wayland support as well, though.
  • SubiculumCode 3y ago
    I'm not familiar with the term, "weird code smells". Do you mean that the code looks shoddy?
• not_your_vase 3y ago
  I'm more surprised that the versioning hell that plagues Wayland isn't mentioned usually anywhere: while in theory protocols are supposed to be backwards compatible, in practice this means that writing a new version starts with copy-pasting the previous version, and extending it - but there is no fallback mechanism in case a client doesn't support the latest and greatest. What really bit me with wlroots (which seems to be the choice of XFCE also) is the input-method protocol: wlroots has v2 implemented, but Qt has v1, v3 and v4 implemented, which makes me laugh to this day - so Qt simply doesn't work wlroots, when it comes to this protocol (to add insult to injury, v4 specification seems to exists in a dead feature branch only that hasn't been touched since years, in the wayland protocols repo). Oh well...