Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #69945 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-07-26 18:40 -0400 |
| Last post | 2025-08-01 19:26 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 188 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Artix Linux and Xlibre Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2025-07-26 18:40 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-27 00:30 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-26 18:47 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-27 01:57 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-26 20:28 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-27 04:38 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 02:38 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2025-08-02 12:13 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-27 00:58 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-27 22:01 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:14 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:55 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 09:33 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-30 21:19 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 23:40 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-30 23:32 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-31 10:30 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-31 17:01 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-31 22:44 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-08-02 09:30 +1000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-01 23:50 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-02 10:03 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-02 13:36 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-02 14:59 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-02 23:59 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-03 12:13 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-03 12:58 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-03 16:34 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-03 17:08 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-03 18:20 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-08-04 09:35 +1000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-04 16:10 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-08-03 13:38 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-03 22:47 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-03 21:55 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 09:03 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-06 09:28 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-06 19:56 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 21:27 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 22:46 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-07 17:46 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-06 13:36 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 12:56 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-07 03:28 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 12:48 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-11 11:26 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-11 21:06 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-11 15:19 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-11 22:27 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-11 15:54 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-12 02:28 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-12 02:27 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-11 22:18 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-11 15:49 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-11 23:27 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-12 08:37 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-12 20:15 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-12 23:29 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 09:05 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-13 19:13 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-08-13 21:32 +0200
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-13 21:29 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-08-14 11:20 +0200
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 12:03 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-14 00:49 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-08-14 11:21 +0200
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-14 01:12 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 13:04 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-14 21:00 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-14 22:48 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-15 02:56 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-17 09:12 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 00:16 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 08:56 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 09:41 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 11:58 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 13:07 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-15 08:27 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-14 00:46 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-14 13:03 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-14 12:31 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 12:46 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-04 00:21 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-04 00:20 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-04 04:24 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 09:05 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-06 20:24 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-04 16:23 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-05 05:54 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-05 08:35 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-05 07:48 +0000
Wayland (was: Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-06 02:28 +0000
Re: Wayland (was: Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-06 04:22 +0000
Re: Wayland Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 09:10 +0100
Re: Wayland Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-06 14:42 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-05 11:04 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-05 20:02 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-05 08:29 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-05 18:19 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-05 19:59 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-05 12:02 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-05 20:10 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-06 04:24 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-08-05 21:46 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-06 06:33 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-08-06 09:13 +1000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-06 04:23 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 09:18 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-06 09:01 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-06 22:11 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-07 03:25 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-07 14:14 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-07 23:14 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-07 15:56 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-08 04:18 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-08 06:00 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-08 08:49 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-08 21:25 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-08 15:38 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-09 00:05 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-11 10:24 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-09 10:58 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-08-09 17:10 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-09 22:33 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-09 22:26 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-10 10:15 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-08-10 09:03 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-10 14:24 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-08-10 07:29 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-10 20:06 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-11 11:56 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-11 21:12 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-11 01:00 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-09 22:39 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-08 08:42 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-08 16:02 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-08-08 09:00 +1000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 13:05 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 09:15 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-06 14:46 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-08-05 08:26 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-03 00:06 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 11:42 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-30 19:39 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-31 01:06 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-30 21:23 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-28 00:21 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-28 13:57 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-28 22:26 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 05:37 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 09:02 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 11:13 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:46 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 23:51 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 23:22 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 11:45 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-30 21:18 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-07-29 07:45 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:44 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-29 16:26 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 23:54 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:17 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-29 23:23 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-29 15:44 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:56 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 09:18 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-07-30 18:18 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2025-08-02 12:15 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-07-27 09:19 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-28 00:19 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 23:06 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-07-28 05:27 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-07-26 18:41 -0700
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-28 00:18 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-07-27 22:40 -0400
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-31 13:48 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2025-07-31 16:22 +0200
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-07-31 17:02 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-07-31 22:58 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-01 01:53 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 08:07 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 09:47 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 10:24 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 10:57 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 11:10 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-01 17:15 +0000
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-01 19:14 +0100
Re: Artix Linux and Xlibre Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-08-01 19:26 +0000
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 21:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <107ip8v$2t49h$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #70929 |
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >In Wayland, the answer is: the application communicates intent to the >display service and the display service decides on how to meet that >intent. > >The application’s requirements are, normally, not that windows must be >positioned at specific locations, but rather than windows must be >positioned in a specific layout with respect to one another and >(perhaps) with respect to elements of the physical display. > >Simple examples of this would be context menus and dialog boxes. The >application doesn’t care where they go as long as it’s somewhere >sensible. If the user wants to include their positioning beyond “they go >somewhere sensible”, they will want to make one global change, not >reconfigure every application. Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I hardly noticed. Greetings Marc -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-13 21:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvy0rn0xuv.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #70932 |
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> writes: > Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I > hardly noticed. For you, apparently yes; for some others, apparently not. Debian trixie is still giving me Xorg at present. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 11:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <107k9o7$30op4$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #70944 |
Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> writes: >> Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I >> hardly noticed. > >For you, apparently yes; for some others, apparently not. Debian trixie >is still giving me Xorg at present. Does it still give Xorg on a new install? I think you may have to switch manually if you upgrade. Greetings Marc, using Debian unstable -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 12:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvv7mqxj0z.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #71022 |
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> writes: > Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> writes: >>> Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I >>> hardly noticed. >> >>For you, apparently yes; for some others, apparently not. Debian trixie >>is still giving me Xorg at present. > > Does it still give Xorg on a new install? I think you may have to > switch manually if you upgrade. Pass. It’s not like there’s really a single ‘new install’ configuration anyway, it may depend on what else you select. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 00:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <107jbq5$6imt$9@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70932 |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 21:32:47 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I hardly > noticed. I switched my laptop first, before following suit with my other machines. Then, after a Debian Unstable upgrade a few months ago, Wayland logins on my laptop stopped working, and I had to go back to X11 for a while. I eventually figured out the problem was connected in some way to the display manager I was using: when I took out lightdm and switched to sddm, Wayland logins worked again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 11:21 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <107k9qc$30ovf$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #70966 |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 21:32:47 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > >> Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I hardly >> noticed. > >I switched my laptop first, before following suit with my other machines. >Then, after a Debian Unstable upgrade a few months ago, Wayland logins on >my laptop stopped working, and I had to go back to X11 for a while. Happens. It's called Unstable for a reason. We expect people to help themselves (and to report bugs, thank you for that, we need high quality bug reports) it Unstable breaks. >I eventually figured out the problem was connected in some way to the >display manager I was using: when I took out lightdm and switched to sddm, >Wayland logins worked again. I _THINK_ I remember that issue, it was one of the nasty ones. Greetings Marc -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 01:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mg4rf7FailaU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #70932 |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 21:32:47 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I hardly > noticed. QGIS had a warning dialog but apparently they've come to grips with Wayland. Otherwise I had to ask the OS what it was using.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 13:04 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107kjcc$d4vh$31@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70932 |
On 13/08/2025 20:32, Marc Haber wrote: > Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> In Wayland, the answer is: the application communicates intent to the >> display service and the display service decides on how to meet that >> intent. >> >> The application’s requirements are, normally, not that windows must be >> positioned at specific locations, but rather than windows must be >> positioned in a specific layout with respect to one another and >> (perhaps) with respect to elements of the physical display. >> >> Simple examples of this would be context menus and dialog boxes. The >> application doesn’t care where they go as long as it’s somewhere >> sensible. If the user wants to include their positioning beyond “they go >> somewhere sensible”, they will want to make one global change, not >> reconfigure every application. > > Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I > hardly noticed. > My guess is that it will depend largely on what you are running on it. I believe I am still running X. > Greetings > Marc -- The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property. Karl Marx
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 21:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mg712jFkdaqU19@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71059 |
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:04:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > My guess is that it will depend largely on what you are running on it. > > I believe I am still running X. So far xeyes runs on Ubuntu. The interesting part is which apps will let the eyes follow. Brave, the Arduino IDE, and VS Code do, most don't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 22:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <107lp48$p5vg$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71059 |
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:04:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > I believe I am still running X. Try launching the “xeyes” program. If the eyes can track the mouse when you move it into a particular window, then that window is being served up via X. If xeyes stops tracking when your mouse is within a window, then it’s a Wayland window. If xeyes won’t run at all, then you have no X11 compatibility.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-15 02:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mg7lviFd1iuU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71059 |
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:04:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in <107kjcc$d4vh$31@dont-email.me>: > On 13/08/2025 20:32, Marc Haber wrote: >> Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> In Wayland, the answer is: the application communicates intent to the >>> display service and the display service decides on how to meet that >>> intent. >>> >>> The application’s requirements are, normally, not that windows must be >>> positioned at specific locations, but rather than windows must be >>> positioned in a specific layout with respect to one another and >>> (perhaps) with respect to elements of the physical display. >>> >>> Simple examples of this would be context menus and dialog boxes. The >>> application doesn’t care where they go as long as it’s somewhere >>> sensible. If the user wants to include their positioning beyond “they >>> go somewhere sensible”, they will want to make one global change, not >>> reconfigure every application. >> >> Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I >> hardly noticed. >> > My guess is that it will depend largely on what you are running on it. > > I believe I am still running X. $ echo $XDG_SESSION_TYPE x11 Running XFCE here -- it's just now starting to have Wayland support, thanks to another library that should allow quite a few traditional window managers to gain Wayland chops. I'm in no hurry, I already get 4K @ 120fps in Elite Dangerous...wondering how obs-studio will act in Wayland, glad that X11 is still an option. -- -v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090Ti 24G OS: Linux 6.16.0 D: Mint 22.1 DE: Xfce 4.18 NVIDIA: 580.65.06 Mem: 258G "Dynamic linking error: Your mistake is now everywhere."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-17 09:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107s2sl$25lfa$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71126 |
On 2025-08-15, vallor wrote: > On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 13:04:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher > <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in <107kjcc$d4vh$31@dont-email.me>: > >> On 13/08/2025 20:32, Marc Haber wrote: >>> Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>> In Wayland, the answer is: the application communicates intent to the >>>> display service and the display service decides on how to meet that >>>> intent. >>>> >>>> The application’s requirements are, normally, not that windows must be >>>> positioned at specific locations, but rather than windows must be >>>> positioned in a specific layout with respect to one another and >>>> (perhaps) with respect to elements of the physical display. >>>> >>>> Simple examples of this would be context menus and dialog boxes. The >>>> application doesn’t care where they go as long as it’s somewhere >>>> sensible. If the user wants to include their positioning beyond “they >>>> go somewhere sensible”, they will want to make one global change, not >>>> reconfigure every application. >>> >>> Are we there yet? When my desktop switched from X11 to Wayland, I >>> hardly noticed. >>> >> My guess is that it will depend largely on what you are running on it. >> >> I believe I am still running X. > > $ echo $XDG_SESSION_TYPE > x11 That comes up empty here, and I'm running X11. When / under which conditions is that set? Or is this meant to be set on a system to customize/choose whether to run e.g. Wayland or X11 with some tools? > Running XFCE here -- it's just now starting to have Wayland support, > thanks to another library that should allow quite a few traditional > window managers to gain Wayland chops. > > I'm in no hurry, I already get 4K @ 120fps in Elite Dangerous...wondering > how obs-studio will act in Wayland, glad that X11 is still an option. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 00:16 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107j6c1$5993$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70929 |
On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: [...] > > I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying something > novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and interactively. > When it comes to the case of applications that want to arrange multiple > windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere in the middle of that > process. From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, sadly, what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring requirements than to identifying requirements. If that is accurate, then it surely won't a good environment to update/enrich requirements and use cases. > Sources: > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 > https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html > https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 08:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwvplcybalm.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #70955 |
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes: > On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying something >> novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and interactively. >> When it comes to the case of applications that want to arrange multiple >> windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere in the middle of that >> process. > > From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, sadly, > what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring requirements than > to identifying requirements. That’s not the impression I get from primary sources, but by all means rely on the peanut gallery instead. >> Sources: >> >> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 >> https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html >> https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ >> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 09:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107k7gf$cfej$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71012 |
On 2025-08-14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes: >> On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > >>> I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying something >>> novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and interactively. >>> When it comes to the case of applications that want to arrange multiple >>> windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere in the middle of that >>> process. >> >> From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, sadly, >> what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring requirements than >> to identifying requirements. > > That’s not the impression I get from primary sources, but by all means > rely on the peanut gallery instead. Yeah, to be clear: I'm not claiming I saw that *myself* from Wayland developers. The only thing I've witnessed was bullying from people in the fediverse, who may have nothing to do with the actual project. I was just bringing that up, given that your post did not mention it at all, if I've read it correctly (I read it last night, and I tend to avoid caffeine before sleep, so it *is* possible I've overlooked something). >>> Sources: >>> >>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html >>> https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ >>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 (I didn't read these sources (yet?), but I've kept these in my reply because it seemed to me that these should be present.) -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 11:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwv1ppeyxsi.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #71013 |
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes: > On 2025-08-14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes: >>> On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>>> I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying >>>> something novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and >>>> interactively. When it comes to the case of applications that want >>>> to arrange multiple windows in a coherent layout, they are >>>> somewhere in the middle of that process. >>> >>> From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, >>> sadly, what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring >>> requirements than to identifying requirements. >> >> That’s not the impression I get from primary sources, but by all >> means rely on the peanut gallery instead. > > Yeah, to be clear: I'm not claiming I saw that *myself* from Wayland > developers. The only thing I've witnessed was bullying from people in > the fediverse, who may have nothing to do with the actual project. Would you draw any conclusions about Linux and its developers from the postings by ‘Farley Fludd’? > I was just bringing that up, given that your post did not mention it at > all, if I've read it correctly (I read it last night, and I tend to > avoid caffeine before sleep, so it *is* possible I've overlooked > something). Indeed, I didn’t. But why would anyone care about fediverse randos? You can find idiots among the supporters of essentially anything; often quite easily, “empty vessels make the most noise” and all that. Relying on them for conclusions about either whatever it is they are supporting, or the people who are actually doing the work, is a blunder. >>>> Sources: >>>> >>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 >>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html >>>> https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ >>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 > > (I didn't read these sources (yet?), but I've kept these in my reply > because it seemed to me that these should be present.) -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 13:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107kjhl$d4vh$32@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70955 |
On 14/08/2025 00:16, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > > [...] >> >> I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying something >> novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and interactively. >> When it comes to the case of applications that want to arrange multiple >> windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere in the middle of that >> process. > > From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, sadly, > what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring requirements than > to identifying requirements. > No one likes being told what to do by a user when you are programming, or a programmer when you are a user. A little give and take helps. As does some management. (Does FOSS do managers?) > If that is accurate, then it surely won't a good environment to > update/enrich requirements and use cases. > >> Sources: >> >> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 >> https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html >> https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ >> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 > -- The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property. Karl Marx
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-15 08:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wwva541yrhe.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #71060 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: > On 14/08/2025 00:16, Nuno Silva wrote: >> On 2025-08-13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying >>> something novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and >>> interactively. When it comes to the case of applications that want >>> to arrange multiple windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere >>> in the middle of that process. >> >> From what has been said in this thread, the case might be that, >> sadly, what they're doing is closer to bullying and ignoring >> requirements than to identifying requirements. > > No one likes being told what to do by a user when you are programming, > or a programmer when you are a user. > > A little give and take helps. As does some management. I interact with my end users is relatively limited ways: calls (and occasionally in-person meetings) set up with specific customers, usually concerning specific issues but occasionally looking at a bigger picture; and escalated support queries. It’s generally pretty useful, we often learn something new about how the customers are using, or want to use, our products, and for support queries we can usually solve a customer’s problem or at least manage their expectations. In contrast FOSS development often happens in a very open environment. Mailing list and issue trackers are open to anyone. A handful of users who see them as channels for complaints, or who can’t let go of a specific issue, can quickly make them unusable. Imagine if some of the behavior seen on this group turned up in a dev mailing list, you’d quickly chuck it in and do something more rewarding instead. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 00:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <107jbkk$6imt$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70929 |
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 19:13:08 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > It didn’t always look the same: anything that used SysV STREAMS had > to change to use sockets or /dev/ptmx or whatever, for example. Mentat offered its “Portable STREAMS” product for various OSes, including Linux. Lots of people were not enthusiastic about STREAMS, which is probably why it never had built-in support in the Linux kernel. Also Steve Jobs didn’t seem to like it. I get the feeling the whole concept is extinct now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-14 13:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <107kjad$d4vh$30@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70929 |
On 13/08/2025 19:13, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> writes: >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Obviously Blender on Wayland has no control over the position of its >>> GUI relative to other applications’ windows, but I never cared about >>> that. >> >> That's fine for you, but yet again you do not seem to understand that >> something not being important to *you, personally* does not mean that >> *other people* don't care about it. >> >> Which is sort of the crux of the whole thing, as the Wayland developers >> also embody this sort of "I don't need XYZ, therefore nobody else does" >> thinking, and are learning the hard way that that kind of attitude is >> mostly only gonna win converts from the set of people who *already* >> think like them. > > Having read around the subject a bit, it’s a lot more complicated than > that. > > If you’re attached to a narrow set of requirements, and either think > that only your favorite requirements need to be satisfied, or > alternatively just want to crow about someone being forced to take your > favorite requirements seriously, don’t bother reading on, just keep > arguing with each other. > > Otherwise... > > The question is where decisions are made about window placement, and how > that is negotiated between an application and a display service. (The > application and the display service are most likely both component-based > systems; they might each be more than one process; the various bits > might not all be on the same physical machine, etc.) > > In Wayland, the answer is: the application communicates intent to the > display service and the display service decides on how to meet that > intent. > > The application’s requirements are, normally, not that windows must be > positioned at specific locations, but rather than windows must be > positioned in a specific layout with respect to one another and > (perhaps) with respect to elements of the physical display. > > Simple examples of this would be context menus and dialog boxes. The > application doesn’t care where they go as long as it’s somewhere > sensible. If the user wants to include their positioning beyond “they go > somewhere sensible”, they will want to make one global change, not > reconfigure every application. > > Another example is for windows to be in the same place they were last > time the application ran, support for which was added a few years ago. > > The Wayland design seems to be that the application tells the display > server what it’s trying to achieve, and the display server figures out > where to put windows in order both to satisfy this and to satisfy any > user-level preferences. > > The other issue is that left to themselves, applications get it > wrong. Examples cited include application positioning their windows > off-screen, or wrongly estimating the size of frames so that > window-level controls are obscured, or mishandling changes to monitor > layout and resolution, or ignoring desktop-wide conventions (e.g. a > tiling window manager). > > The conclusion Wayland seems to have reached from these two things that > is that since applications shouldn’t need to control absolute positions, > and since when they do try to control absolute positions they get it > wrong, the ability to set absolute positions is not available. > > What this means is that the protocol needs to include support for each > realistic set of application goals. Almost everything has context menus, > dialog boxes, etc so they were in from relatively early. Persistence of > positions across session restarts came later. Applications trying to do > something more complex aren’t there yet. > > A comparison could be drawn with the early days of Linux. In my first > job a lot of our code started life on SunOS, UnixWare and possibly even > older things. As time progressed more of it migrated to Linux, and > sometimes I ran into things that just weren’t there in Linux and had to > work around them. > > This was mildly annoying, certainly, but nobody concluded from this > either that the things missing from Linux weren’t needed, nor that Linux > was deliberately ignoring particular requirements, and when Linux moved > forward nobody thought it had conceded after some kind of fight. > > Rather, everybody knew it was a work in progress and that missing > functionality would turn up sooner or later, in some form. It didn’t > always look the same: anything that used SysV STREAMS had to change to > use sockets or /dev/ptmx or whatever, for example. > > In a very distributed fashion, the Linux world was empirically searching > out the requirements imposed on Linux by the applications people wanted > to run on it, and sometimes taking the opportunity to improve on the > state of the art as they did so. I’m quite glad not to have had to deal > with STREAMS for a few decades... > > I think the situation with Wayland is similar. They’re trying something > novel, and are identifying requirements incrementally and interactively. > When it comes to the case of applications that want to arrange multiple > windows in a coherent layout, they are somewhere in the middle of that > process. > > Sources: > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264 > https://www.mail-archive.com/wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg41606.html > https://canonical-mir.readthedocs-hosted.com/latest/explanation/window-positions-under-wayland/ > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/18 > +1 . Thanks for the sanity. Unusually for me, I am pro Wayland if it gets the bugs sorted out. In a way I never was with postscript or X windows, or systemd. It does seem to be a genuine attempt to *simplify* things rather than an exercise in ego massaging obfuscation disguised as ubiquity. (I agree STREAMS was an even more complicated way to make TCP/IP more inaccessible than sockets. I am rather enjoying the LW-IP stack use on pi PICOS). -- Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age. Richard Lindzen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web