3 ms·

Why would the two be related? One is a replacement for Flash. the Other for X?

• valarauca1 12y ago
  I think the user was just listing things they are excited for. Not drawing relationships between them.
• evilpie 12y ago
  Maybe Adobe Flash doesn't work with pure Wayland, but needs X? So with Shumway you wouldn't need an X compositor (at least for Flash)
• shmerl 12y ago
  Flash is dependent on GTK2 and for Wayland GTK3 is required. So ideally Firefox for Wayland shouldn't have any dependencies on GTK2 stuff (since mixing them together in one process isn't really a good idea, plus even if you manage to mix them somehow in separate processes GTK2 would still require X to function, so you'll have to fall back to XWayland in that case probably which is already not ideal). So Shumway can solve this (at least in context of Flash) replacing the Flash plugin altogether. For more details, see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=627699 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=627699
  • amaranth 12y ago
    Firefox already uses an external process to run Flash so leaving that on GTK2 while the browser uses GTK3 isn't an issue. The equivalent of XEmbed (to put the flash content in the page) in Wayland is writing a nested Wayland compositor which would be compatible with an XWayland window. Basically, Firefox itself can be a native Wayland app while still using the X11 dependent Flash player.