2021-09-17 13:54 GMT+02:00, Страхиња Радић :
> Exactly what Wayland's monolithic,
> opinionated concept doesn't. If a compositor crashes, the whole session
> goes
> down.
Wayland isn't monolithic, BUT is a faulty funnel. It does one thing,
does it poorly, and cuts some well-established use cases i
On 21/09/16, 20:36, Kyryl Melekhin wrote:
>And remember, always follow unix philosophy - go for what works first, optimize
>it later.
This should read "programs should do one thing and do it well" (DOTADIW)[1],
with the added "and work together". Exactly what Wayland's monolithic,
opinionated con
Hi,
I think much of the hate for wayland is misdirected. Don't get me wrong,
the state of wayland is bad. But IMHO that is not entirely the wayland
people's fault.
What they did is saying: "Hey guys, we are tired of maintaining X. We
will start a new project with a tighter focus. The wider l
Hello guys,
I recently tried out Wayland and here are some of my thoughts.
They market it as a "shiny new object". OK. So I compiled all the libs,
and tried the dwl compositor. I like suckless and dwl supposed to be
like dwm but on wayland.
Let's perform a simple test: I open the foot terminal (
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 08:26:27AM +0200, Laslo Hunhold wrote:
> The gaslighting regarding Wayland wasted me a lot of time, as I'm told
> or I read every year that _now_ would be the time to switch to Wayland.
Just like _this_ year is the year of the Linux desktop? And then, when
the market share
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 15:21:58 +0600
NRK wrote:
Dear NRK,
> Adding to what Laslo has already said:
>
> I think it's laughable that that wayland devolopers claim wayland to
> be a replacement for X while actively ignoring many use-case and
> forcing their "perfect frame" philosophy onto the users.
Hi,
Adding to what Laslo has already said:
I think it's laughable that that wayland devolopers claim wayland to be
a replacement for X while actively ignoring many use-case and forcing
their "perfect frame" philosophy onto the users.
It is _OK_ if the devs prioritize having perfect frame and wan
On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 20:34:20 +
Hadrien Lacour wrote:
Dear Hadrien,
> This, it would have been a great goal to modularize X11 and keep the
> worthy parts, not just reduce it to an exercise in "minimalism" (and
> complete lack of portability) and expect the free FOSS market to
> magically solv
On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 08:35:33PM +0200, Laslo Hunhold wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 14:28:29 +0100
> Nick wrote:
>
> Dear Nick,
>
> > Any thoughts, experiences, recommendations?
>
> the discussion has been very fruitful. Let me share my thoughts.
>
> Wayland the protocol is actually rather simple
On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 14:28:29 +0100
Nick wrote:
Dear Nick,
> Any thoughts, experiences, recommendations?
the discussion has been very fruitful. Let me share my thoughts.
Wayland the protocol is actually rather simple. It's a very thin
messaging layer between a compositor and clients, nothing mo
Hi Nick,
thanks for sharing dwl. I started writing some patches and it really
feels very close to dwm. Not fully there yet, but close.
also: don't feed the trolls
tobias
Quoth Страхиња Радић:
> On 21/09/08 01:36, Nick wrote:
> > The fact that the Jitsi devs closed
> > the bug as "not much we can do on our side" doesn't mean "wayland
> > broke it and we can't fix it".
>
> It's exactly the same thing.
In this instance it isn't, maybe I should have been more verbo
On 21/09/08 01:36, Nick wrote:
> The fact that the Jitsi devs closed
> the bug as "not much we can do on our side" doesn't mean "wayland
> broke it and we can't fix it".
It's exactly the same thing.
> the screen recording / sharing stuff - it works differently on
> Wayland (for not-bad reasons
Quoth Страхиња Радић:
> On 21/09/08 12:28, Nick wrote:
> > honest I found the arguments made there to be largely unconvincing,
>
> Any argument in particular and why?
A lot of the "Wayland breaks" examples don't seem to be fairly
reporting on the actual issues. The jitsi screen sharing issue, f
By the way, here's another article not on Github (but linked from that page):
https://tildearrow.org/?p=post&month=2&year=2021&item=antihs
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 21/09/08 12:28, Nick wrote:
> honest I found the arguments made there to be largely unconvincing,
Any argument in particular and why?
> * I'm thinking in particular of the repeated "emojis broke my st"
> mails, caused by a bug in Xft that noone upstream seems to care much
> about fixing,
Hi Maarten et al,
Many thanks for your replies, this was very handy to read.
Interesting to hear that sxmo is moving in the wayland direction,
too. I haven't managed to get around to actually trying wayland yet,
as as ever my attention has been pulled in too many different
directions. But I'l
* Hadrien Lacour [2021-08-31 15:43]:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 03:49:43PM +0200, Maarten van Gompel wrote:
dwm -> sway (granted, not the same thing)
svkbd -> wvkbd (see https://github.com/jjsullivan5196/wvkbd/pull/2)
st -> foot
dmenu -> bemenu
If only there was an equivalent to lemonbar
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 03:49:43PM +0200, Maarten van Gompel wrote:
> Hi Nick et al,
>
> With Sxmo we're currently also moving towards wayland (we'll have to
> reinvent what the X in our name means then). We found that, especially
> on the Pinephone, the performance under Wayland is simply superio
Hi Nick et al,
With Sxmo we're currently also moving towards wayland (we'll have to
reinvent what the X in our name means then). We found that, especially
on the Pinephone, the performance under Wayland is simply superior to
that on X11. We settled on sway to replace dwm, as dwl still lacks the
m
On 21/08/31 02:28, Nick wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm thinking it would be fun to play around with Wayland, so was
> looking at different compositors (which do window management plus
> other stuff). Has anyone else on the list taken Wayland for a spin
> and had any experience with them?
>
> From a
Hi all,
I'm thinking it would be fun to play around with Wayland, so was
looking at different compositors (which do window management plus
other stuff). Has anyone else on the list taken Wayland for a spin
and had any experience with them?
>From a search around the 3 that look interesting to m
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Mattias Andrée wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:54:43 +0200
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:16:06PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
>> > Silvan Jegen wrote:
> [...]
>> The Wayland protocol deals with input as well so
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:04:20PM +0200, patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> Quote:
> Display server expert Daniel Stone explains what is really happening
Display server expert.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Silvan Jegen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:41:57PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
> > Silvan Jegen wrote:
> >
> > Hey Silvan,
> >
> > > One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> > > Wayland (dont forget
It was indeed quite interesting decision from Fedora. It seems that
Fedora is serious about it.
"The rumors of its death are greatly exaggerated... Sailfish OS has been
using Wayland from the start and Fedora wants to make Wayland the default
for their next release (I wouldn't count on it)."
2016
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:54:43 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:16:06PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
> > Silvan Jegen wrote:
> > > Since Wayland is only a protocol, as long as both the
> > > client and the server follow it closely enough both
> >
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:16:06PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
> > Since Wayland is only a protocol, as long as both the client and the
> > server follow it closely enough both the clients and the server will
> > be happy. What is crucial is that t
I believe that we will have to strive to keep X11.
2016-08-02 20:33 GMT+02:00 Silvan Jegen :
> Heyho
>
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:27:49PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
>> patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>>
>> Hey Patrick,
>>
>> > Do you believe that Wayland will re
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the goal of the Wayland devs is to keep the
> required protocols to a minimum and graduate prooven protocol
> extensions to official Wayland ones.
It sounds good on paper, but really turns out to be a horrible mess
in
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 08:41:57PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
> Silvan Jegen wrote:
>
> Hey Silvan,
>
> > One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> > Wayland (dont forget Xprint[0] :P). The Wayland protocol also does not
> > allow for co
this has been discussed here often enough.
just discuss this bullshit with your hackernews friends next time.
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:33:39 +0200
Silvan Jegen wrote:
Hey Silvan,
> One can argue that having a simple protocol *is* the suckless part of
> Wayland (dont forget Xprint[0] :P). The Wayland protocol also does not
> allow for communication between clients directly[1] but only through
> the Wayland
Heyho
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:27:49PM +0200, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
> patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
>
> Hey Patrick,
>
> > Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
>
> this is a tough question to answer. If we are headed on the current
> cou
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
Hey Patrick,
> Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
this is a tough question to answer. If we are headed on the current
course, I think we will face even more difficult times in the future
with worse mon
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:04:20 +0200
patrick295767 patrick295767 wrote:
> Hi,
Ahoy!
>
> Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one
> day?;)
Yes — and it will be horrible.
The worst part of Wayland it encourages you
to write your own display server with all of
features in one single pr
Hi,
Do you believe that Wayland will replace X11 one day?;)
Besides, don't you believe that Ubuntu may have time to time some
negative influence on Linux phylosophy?
Quote:
Display server expert Daniel Stone explains what is really happening
with the future of graphical display protocols on
> I'm the author of the port. I'm not sure how the suckless community
> feels about Wayland, but it seems like the core protocol is fairly
> lightweight, depends only on libffi, and is refreshing to work with
> compared to X. Weston's goals are perhaps more orthogonal to suckless,
> but I think the
Hi there,
On 29 July 2013 13:35, Michael Forney wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:47:49 +0200, Silvan Jegen wrote:
>> So the reason you would not want dwm to be a shell plugin for Weston is
>> that Weston is too focused on fancy modern features, correct?
>
> Eh, maybe I am being a bit too hard on
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:47:49 +0200, Silvan Jegen wrote:
> So the reason you would not want dwm to be a shell plugin for Weston is
> that Weston is too focused on fancy modern features, correct?
Eh, maybe I am being a bit too hard on Weston. It just seems to be
growing quite steadily which scares
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:08:44AM -0700, Michael Forney wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 09:59:06 +0200, Silvan Jegen wrote:
> > I am very interested in st (as well as other suckless projects)
> > on weston/wayland as well.
> >
> > The wayland protocol seems to be very concise and it certainly does
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 09:59:06 +0200, Silvan Jegen wrote:
> I am very interested in st (as well as other suckless projects)
> on weston/wayland as well.
>
> The wayland protocol seems to be very concise and it certainly does not
> come with all of the legacy baggage of X. That said, I noticed that
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 04:15:59PM +1000, oneofthem wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:43:00PM -0700, Michael Forney wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:17:42 -0400, Carlos Torres
> > wrote:
> > > I didn't know about this
> > >
> > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQyMTQ
> >
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:43:00PM -0700, Michael Forney wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:17:42 -0400, Carlos Torres
> wrote:
> > I didn't know about this
> >
> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQyMTQ
> >
> > I'm both excited or looking to troll
>
> I'm the author of the po
Hi Michael.
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Michael Forney wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:17:42 -0400, Carlos Torres
> wrote:
>> I didn't know about this
>>
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQyMTQ
>>
>> I'm both excited or looking to troll
>
> I'm the author of the port.
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:17:42 -0400, Carlos Torres wrote:
> I didn't know about this
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQyMTQ
>
> I'm both excited or looking to troll
I'm the author of the port. I'm not sure how the suckless community
feels about Wayland, but it seems like
I didn't know about this
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQyMTQ
I'm both excited or looking to troll
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 09:59:44PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> > your mother is a better replacement for X11.
>
> i'd hardly call his mother network-transparent
>
Well, you can usually see a lot of things connecting to her I hear.
--
#Arthur D
On 23/10/2012, Hugues Moretto-Viry wrote:
> What do you think about Wayland?
Guess: http://wayland.freedesktop.org/docs/html/chap-Protocol.html
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 09:59:44PM +0200, hiro wrote:
> your mother is a better replacement for X11.
i'd hardly call his mother network-transparent
>
As I said, I haven't looked into it. My statement is based on what I've
heard. I'll of course try it myself and see if I can find out if it's a
good replacement or not.
Thanks, klr
On Oct 23, 2012 9:59 PM, "hiro" <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> your mother is a better replacement for X11.
>
>
your mother is a better replacement for X11.
I haven't looked into it yet, but it will hopefully be a replacement of
X11.
Thanks, klr
On Oct 23, 2012 7:41 PM, "Hugues Moretto-Viry"
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> With the new Wayland version 1.0, the change is coming slowly. What do you
> think about Wayland?
> Actually, I'm using many WM like dwm,
Wow high level.
Envoyé d'thisagain
Hi guys,
With the new Wayland version 1.0, the change is coming slowly. What do you
think about Wayland?
Actually, I'm using many WM like dwm, and I would like to know how the devs
see the future.
Thanks.
Here links:
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Wayland-s-1-0-milestone-fixes-graphics-pr
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 03:52:01PM +, Nick wrote:
>
> I disagree, presuming I understood you correctly. You just
> draw stuff straight into an OpenGL buffer. Or get your
> toolkit to do that. How is this not a reasonable thing to
> do?
Because it's the same attitude that makes X11 and termina
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:38:02AM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> In short, wayland manages to push everything including rendering onto
> the client, which means it's just going to get harder to write graphical
> programs without a toolkit. I regard this as a major flaw; this
> 'design decision' can
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 04:15:54PM +0100, Bernhard Leiner wrote:
>
> I attended the talk and as far as I understood it, the Weston
> reference compositor will provide some kind of interface that can be
> used by alternative window managers. There was a question in that
> direction at the end of th
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:28:28 +0100
Eckehard Berns wrote:
>I might be wrong, but my biggest fear is that using Wayland means that
>I'm getting the current desktop paradigm shoved down my throat. If I
>understand this correctly something like dwm would be implemented in
>the compositor (for the win
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Nick wrote:
> Yes, that's what I got from the article too. Which would
> mean that a dwm Wayland version would basically need to
> implement the Wayland API. Meaning it would probably need to
> be rather more than 2000 LOC.
I attended the talk and as far as I unde
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 03:28:28PM +0100, Eckehard Berns wrote:
> I might be wrong, but my biggest fear is that using Wayland means that
> I'm getting the current desktop paradigm shoved down my throat. If I
> understand this correctly something like dwm would be implemented in the
> compositor (fo
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:02:52AM +0100, ilf wrote:
> "Programming X-Windows is like trying to find the square root of pi
> using Roman numerals" - Anon
>
> http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Wayland-Beyond-X-1432046.html?view=print
>
> Has anyone managed to run it yet?
>
> Opinions?
I migh
FOSDEM 2012 talk about Wayland [1] is more detailed I guess.
[1]
http://video.fosdem.org/2012/maintracks/k.1.105/Wayland.webm
"Programming X-Windows is like trying to find the square root of pi
using Roman numerals" - Anon
http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Wayland-Beyond-X-1432046.html?view=print
Has anyone managed to run it yet?
Opinions?
--
ilf
Über 80 Millionen Deutsche benutzen keine Konsole. Klick dich nic
65 matches
Mail list logo
