Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #246091 > unrolled thread

Wayland vs X

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Wayland vs X Kevin Exton <kcexton01@gmail.com> - 2022-03-08 23:20 +0100
    Re: Wayland vs X Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2022-03-09 11:00 +0100
      Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-09 11:20 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-09 15:00 +0100
          Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-09 16:30 +0100
            Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-09 21:30 +0100
              Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-10 16:30 +0100
                Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-10 18:30 +0100
                  Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-10 19:10 +0100
                    Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-10 21:30 +0100
                      Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 00:10 +0100
                        Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-11 13:10 +0100
                          Re: Wayland vs X Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2022-03-11 14:20 +0100
                            Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-11 15:10 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-11 17:40 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 21:10 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-11 23:10 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-12 01:10 +0100
                            Re: Wayland vs X Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2022-03-11 19:30 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2022-03-11 20:30 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2022-03-11 22:10 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-11 23:20 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-12 07:40 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2022-03-14 16:30 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2022-03-14 17:50 +0100
                                    Re: Wayland vs X Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2022-03-14 18:30 +0100
                                      Re: Wayland vs X Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2022-03-14 20:30 +0100
                                        Re: Wayland vs X Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 21:10 +0100
                          Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 21:20 +0100
                            Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-11 23:10 +0100
                          Re: Wayland vs X The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-03-11 21:50 +0100
                            Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 22:10 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 22:30 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2022-03-11 22:40 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X 황병희 <soyeomul@doraji.xyz> - 2022-03-16 07:20 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2022-03-11 22:30 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X conover@panix.com (John Conover) - 2022-03-11 23:00 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-03-11 22:40 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 23:00 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-03-11 23:00 +0100
                                    Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-11 23:10 +0100
                            Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-12 07:30 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-03-12 13:30 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-12 13:40 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-12 15:00 +0100
                                    Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-12 15:10 +0100
                                  Re: Wayland vs X The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-03-13 00:40 +0100
                              Re: Wayland vs X Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2022-03-12 21:10 +0100
                                Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-12 22:00 +0100
                Re: Wayland vs X didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2022-03-10 18:30 +0100
      Re: Wayland vs X Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net> - 2022-03-09 11:40 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-09 11:50 +0100
    Re: Wayland vs X Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2022-03-09 11:50 +0100
      Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-09 12:00 +0100
      Re: Wayland vs X Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2022-03-09 18:20 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-09 18:50 +0100
          Re: Wayland vs X Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2022-03-09 20:00 +0100
            Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-09 20:40 +0100
              Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-09 20:50 +0100
                Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-09 21:30 +0100
                  Re: Wayland vs X gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2022-03-09 21:40 +0100
                    Re: Wayland vs X <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-03-09 22:00 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2022-03-09 21:20 +0100
    Re: Wayland vs X 황병희 <soyeomul@doraji.xyz> - 2022-03-16 07:00 +0100
      Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-16 08:00 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2022-03-16 08:20 +0100
          Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-16 08:30 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X "Byung-Hee HWANG" <soyeomul@doraji.xyz> - 2022-03-16 08:40 +0100
        Re: Wayland vs X Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2022-03-16 12:40 +0100
          Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-16 13:10 +0100
            Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-16 13:20 +0100
              Re: Wayland vs X Emanuel Berg <moasenwood@zoho.eu> - 2022-03-16 13:40 +0100

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#246091 — Wayland vs X

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I tried Wayland some years ago now (might have been when they first
trialled it in Ubuntu) but decided not to stick with it.

Since more desktop environments are beginning to choose Wayland as the
default display protocol, I was wondering if others think there's
significant user benefits to making the change?

- Kevin

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#246109

On 3/9/22 00:01, Kevin Exton wrote:
> I tried Wayland some years ago now (might have been when they first
> trialled it in Ubuntu) but decided not to stick with it.
> 
> Since more desktop environments are beginning to choose Wayland as the
> default display protocol, I was wondering if others think there's
> significant user benefits to making the change?

Hi Kevin,

Wayland has new features, better security model and improved
performance, and these areas of improvements seem considerable to me.

Kind regards
Georgi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246111

Georgi Naplatanov wrote:

> Wayland has new features, better security model and improved
> performance, and these areas of improvements seem
> considerable to me.

When I tried it the last time I looked for a xinit or startx
which are the ways I start X (from scripts, e.g.
https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.zprofile )

I then run a bunch of programs in ~/.xinitrc

I asked what the equivalence was and was told there
wasn't any. I was instead pointed to a login manager (I don't
use one and don't want one).

Then instead of all my software [1] I saw some weird GUI,
totally unappealing.

Is there, this day and age, a Wayland equivalent to
xinit/startx, the .xinitrc and .Xresources files and so on?

Or better yet, maybe it can even use them transparently?

If so, and if it is better, I'd be happy to try ... if not,
these guys missed an obvious opportunity that should have been
the way (or one of the available ways) from day 1.

[1] https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.xinitrc

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246120

Le mercredi 09 mars 2022 à 11:14 +0100, Emanuel Berg a écrit :
> 
> When I tried it the last time I looked for a xinit or startx
> which are the ways I start X (from scripts, e.g.
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.zprofile )
> 
> I then run a bunch of programs in ~/.xinitrc
> 
> I asked what the equivalence was and was told there
> wasn't any. I was instead pointed to a login manager (I don't
> use one and don't want one).
> 
> Then instead of all my software [1] I saw some weird GUI,
> totally unappealing.
> 
> Is there, this day and age, a Wayland equivalent to
> xinit/startx, the .xinitrc and .Xresources files and so on?
> 
> Or better yet, maybe it can even use them transparently?
> 
> If so, and if it is better, I'd be happy to try ... if not,
> these guys missed an obvious opportunity that should have been
> the way (or one of the available ways) from day 1.
> 
> [1] https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.xinitrc
> 

Hello,

I use Gnome Classic (with Debian that means Xorg, not Wayland) so I am definitely not familiar (nor knowledgeable) with Wayland.

But am I wrong? I was thinking that one could start a Wayland compositor from a TTY (so, also from a script), with a particular configuration if she/he wishes, and launch GUI programs in this environment?

For example:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Wayland
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/497647/start-a-qt-wayland-application-on-top-of-weston-on-startup

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246123

didier gaumet wrote:

> But am I wrong? I was thinking that one could start
> a Wayland compositor from a TTY (so, also from a script),
> with a particular configuration if she/he wishes, and launch
> GUI programs in this environment?

Okay, that's how I start X (from a tty, tty6 to be precise)

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.zprofile [line 50]

how do I do the same with Wayland?

Il frappe ... il frappe duuur

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246137

Le mercredi 09 mars 2022 à 16:29 +0100, Emanuel Berg a écrit :
> didier gaumet wrote:
> 
> > But am I wrong? I was thinking that one could start
> > a Wayland compositor from a TTY (so, also from a script),
> > with a particular configuration if she/he wishes, and launch
> > GUI programs in this environment?
> 
> Okay, that's how I start X (from a tty, tty6 to be precise)
> 
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.zprofile [line 50]
> 
> how do I do the same with Wayland?
> 
> Il frappe ... il frappe duuur

from what I understand (but I am not familiar with nor have never tried all of this):

- with X, you launch X with startx that is set up via .xinitrc and/or .xsession to suit your goals

- with Wayland, instead, you launch a compositor (a window-manager that implements the Wayland protocol, sort of). You have the choice of the compositor ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_display_servers#Wayland ).
So how you set up and launch the compositor depends on the compositor chosen , I imagine (cf respective manpages).
 And if you want to execute pure X applications that are not Wayland compatible, you must first launch Xwayland ( https://wiki.debian.org/Wayland#Xwayland )

(as always, if what I say is wrong or inaccurate and someone can correct or precise it, please do)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246163

didier gaumet wrote:

> - with X, you launch X with startx that is set up via .xinitrc
> and/or .xsession to suit your goals

Yes, well, there are other files of course, notably
~/.Xresources (loaded with 'xrdb ~/.Xresources', conveniently
from ~/.xinitrc) which hold settings that are/can be general
(cross-application) to some extent, e.g.

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.Xresources

> - with Wayland, instead, you launch a compositor (a
> window-manager that implements the Wayland protocol, sort of).
> You have the choice of the compositor (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_display_servers#Wayland
> ).

Hm, I use a compositor for/in X as well, it is launched in
.xinitrc before the window manager, I've heard it makes
toggling between windows in X faster and what I can tell (not
100) it seems to be the case as well. E.g.

  picom &
  openbsd-cwm &

in

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/conf/.xinitrc

> So how you set up and launch the compositor depends on the
> compositor chosen , I imagine (cf respective manpages).
> And if you want to execute pure X applications that are not
> Wayland compatible, you must first launch Xwayland (
> https://wiki.debian.org/Wayland#Xwayland )

What are the pure X applications? This is the software I use
almost every day

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/SOFTWARE

The ones that start with an "x" are xterm and xpdf ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246165

[...]
> What are the pure X applications? This is the software I use 
> almost every day 
> 
> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/SOFTWARE 
[...]

I just took a look at two of these apps:
- mpv uses libsdl2, so it should be Wayland compatible
- feh uses libx11-6, so it should not be Wayland compatible

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246168

didier gaumet wrote:

> I just took a look at two of these apps:
> - mpv uses libsdl2, so it should be Wayland compatible
> - feh uses libx11-6, so it should not be Wayland compatible

OK, thanks, I won't switch then I think ... I like feh and use
it a lot.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246171

Le jeudi 10 mars 2022 à 19:00 +0100, Emanuel Berg a écrit :
> didier gaumet wrote:
> 
> > I just took a look at two of these apps:
> > - mpv uses libsdl2, so it should be Wayland compatible
> > - feh uses libx11-6, so it should not be Wayland compatible
> 
> OK, thanks, I won't switch then I think ... I like feh and use
> it a lot.
> 

Just to be clear in case there would be a misunderstanding because my sentence was not accurate enough: what I meant is feh (for example) is not directly compatible with Wayland, but can be run in the X11 compatibility layer of Wayland (Xwayland, the nested X server that can be run inside Wayland)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246180

didier gaumet wrote:

>> OK, thanks, I won't switch then I think ... I like feh and
>> use it a lot.
> 
> Just to be clear in case there would be a misunderstanding
> because my sentence was not accurate enough: what I meant is
> feh (for example) is not directly compatible with Wayland, but
> can be run in the X11 compatibility layer of Wayland
> (Xwayland, the nested X server that can be run inside
> Wayland)

No, I understood, but that sounds like too much emulator ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246189

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* On 2022 10 Mar 17:04 -0600, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> didier gaumet wrote:
> 
> >> OK, thanks, I won't switch then I think ... I like feh and
> >> use it a lot.
> > 
> > Just to be clear in case there would be a misunderstanding
> > because my sentence was not accurate enough: what I meant is
> > feh (for example) is not directly compatible with Wayland, but
> > can be run in the X11 compatibility layer of Wayland
> > (Xwayland, the nested X server that can be run inside
> > Wayland)
> 
> No, I understood, but that sounds like too much emulator ...

My understanding is that xwayland is an X server that runs under
Wayland and the idea is that it handles X protocols but Wayland handles
the video drivers and screen drawing.

I have used Gnome on Wayland since late 2018.  It improved a lot with
the release of Bullseye.  I use this setup on two machines, a laptop and
a desktop that has two monitors.  So far I have not had any issues with
any Debian provided packages.  They just work, including feh which I call
from neomutt to display images.  No fuss, no configuration, it just
works.  I've even built and locally installed GTK2 apps without issue.

I did have a display issue with a proprietary third party program that
was built with some older version of Qt, as I recall.  That has been
replaced by a version that is FOSS and it works fine.  On the desktop
with dual monitors I have xscreensaver running and it has the most
issues with detecting events as when I do strictly keyboard work it will
time out and start running a saver.  Moving the mouse wakes it up.  It
also glitches at other times even when using the mouse, but this is not
a show stopper for me.  It also doesn't handle DPMS on Wayland either
which I can live with (I'm sure the built in Gnome blanker works just
fine).

My GPUs are stock Intel on board graphics as I don't game nor do I need
fancy 3D capability.  This hardware is sufficient for displaying the GL
screen savers and for whatever compositing requirements Gnome has.

HTH

- Nate

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246190

On 2022-03-11 12:47 UTC+0100, Nate Bargmann wrote:

> I have used Gnome on Wayland since late 2018.  It improved a lot with
> the release of Bullseye.  I use this setup on two machines, a laptop and
> a desktop that has two monitors.  So far I have not had any issues with

And what is the practical _advantage_ over a X11 setup?

The question is serious. Everytime I tried Wayland, something was not
working as expected, uncomfortable to use and so on. Yes, Wayland
support has improved a lot, but I still do not really see what I miss
because I stick to X11. I know that Wayland has a cleaner design, but
that bothers me not too much as a user.

Regards,
Christian

-- 
http://www.cb-fraggle.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246191

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* On 2022 11 Mar 07:16 -0600, Christian Britz wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2022-03-11 12:47 UTC+0100, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> 
> > I have used Gnome on Wayland since late 2018.  It improved a lot with
> > the release of Bullseye.  I use this setup on two machines, a laptop and
> > a desktop that has two monitors.  So far I have not had any issues with
> 
> And what is the practical _advantage_ over a X11 setup?

Gnome is now native with Wayland and its visual effects only work with
Wayland as I understand it.  I did try Gnome Flashback as it runs on X11
and the visual effects were disabled.  In some cases that's not an
issue and is likely appropriate for some hardware.

> The question is serious. Everytime I tried Wayland, something was not
> working as expected, uncomfortable to use and so on. Yes, Wayland
> support has improved a lot, but I still do not really see what I miss
> because I stick to X11. I know that Wayland has a cleaner design, but
> that bothers me not too much as a user.

Interesting as no one uses Wayland or X11 directly but through a window
manager or quite likely one of the desktop environments.  Debian
packaging seems to sort this out where a DE like Xfce only installs Xorg
packages and Gnome installs Wayland and Xwayland.

That said, if hardware support is not present, then I suspect that any
advanced features will have problems.  Use what works for you.  I am
just providing my experience as I'm not a cheerleader for Wayland or
against Xorg, just a satisfied user of both.

- Nate

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246194

Le vendredi 11 mars 2022 à 08:07 -0600, Nate Bargmann a écrit :
> 
> Gnome is now native with Wayland and its visual effects only work
> with
> Wayland as I understand it.  I did try Gnome Flashback as it runs on
> X11
> and the visual effects were disabled.  In some cases that's not an
> issue and is likely appropriate for some hardware.
[...]

If I am not wrong:
- Gnome (aka Gnome shell) can run in X or Wayland (Debian defaults to 
Wayland), its window manager is Mutter and it needs an hardware
accelerated graphic card
- Gnome Classic is a pre-configured Gnome2-like DE based on Gnome
shell, it cans also run in X or Wayland (but Debian still defaults to X
in Bullseye), its window manager is Mutter and it needs an hardware
accelerated graphic card
- Gnome Flashback is an evolution of the old Gnome Fallback, it can run
in X but not in Wayland as its window manager is Metacity (like
Gnome2). It's a Gnome2-like DE that does not require an hardware
accelerated graphic card

So Gnome Classic would probably suits you better than Gnome Flashback

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246209

Nate Bargmann wrote:

> Interesting as no one uses Wayland or X11 directly but
> through a window manager or quite likely one of the desktop
> environments.

I don't know, I think it is fair to say I use X "directly",
I start it manually (but automatically, the command is in
a file) in a tty and then in ~/xinitrc launch a compositor and
WM, then xterm with tmux:

picom &
openbsd-cwm &

xterm           \
    -T 'xterm'  \
    -fullscreen \
    -e 'tmux new-session\; split-window -v\; select-pane -U'

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246222

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

* On 2022 11 Mar 14:06 -0600, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> Nate Bargmann wrote:
> 
> > Interesting as no one uses Wayland or X11 directly but
> > through a window manager or quite likely one of the desktop
> > environments.
> 
> I don't know, I think it is fair to say I use X "directly",
> I start it manually (but automatically, the command is in
> a file) in a tty and then in ~/xinitrc launch a compositor and
> WM, then xterm with tmux:
> 
> picom &
> openbsd-cwm &
> 
> xterm           \
>     -T 'xterm'  \
>     -fullscreen \
>     -e 'tmux new-session\; split-window -v\; select-pane -U'

I suspect you're not the target audience for Wayland as it seems to me
to be oriented toward the main desktop projects.  I don't see that your
use case would gain anything moving to Gnome or KDE.

That's the great thing about Free systems, we don't all have to do
things the same way.

- Nate

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246226

Nate Bargmann wrote:

>> picom &
>> openbsd-cwm &
>> 
>> xterm           \
>>     -T 'xterm'  \
>>     -fullscreen \
>>     -e 'tmux new-session\; split-window -v\; select-pane -U'
>
> I suspect you're not the target audience for Wayland as it
> seems to me to be oriented toward the main desktop projects.
> I don't see that your use case would gain anything moving to
> Gnome or KDE.

Sweet heavens, you are expected to do that with Wayland?!

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246203

On 11.03.22 14:14, Christian Britz wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2022-03-11 12:47 UTC+0100, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> 
>> I have used Gnome on Wayland since late 2018.  It improved a lot with
>> the release of Bullseye.  I use this setup on two machines, a laptop and
>> a desktop that has two monitors.  So far I have not had any issues with
> 
> And what is the practical _advantage_ over a X11 setup?
> 
> The question is serious. Everytime I tried Wayland, something was not
> working as expected, uncomfortable to use and so on. Yes, Wayland
> support has improved a lot, but I still do not really see what I miss
> because I stick to X11. I know that Wayland has a cleaner design, but
> that bothers me not too much as a user.
> 
> Regards,
> Christian
> 

Isn't it all about X by design to not be able to safely protect a 
running X applications to snoop on other running X applications, 
something like the content of a window cannot safely kept private? I 
remember to have read that Wayland was invented for this reason, to 
overcome these security flaws of X which in the beginning of X have not 
been a concern to anyone, but nowadays security issues are of much 
importance to almost everyone.
(I have no reference for this statement, just remember to have something 
like this read in the past)
And isn't it because of Wayland protecting windows by design against 
other windows, that operations like Copy&Paste between GUI applications 
are (still) not always running smoothly and need extra efforts to become 
well implemented?
(Again, I have no reference for this statement, just remember to have 
something like this read in the past)

Regards,
Marco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#246208

On Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Marco M?ller wrote:

> Isn't it all about X by design to not be able to safely protect a running X 
> applications to snoop on other running X applications, something like the 
> content of a window cannot safely kept private? I remember to have read that 
> Wayland was invented for this reason, to overcome these security flaws of X 
> which in the beginning of X have not been a concern to anyone, but nowadays 
> security issues are of much importance to almost everyone.
> (I have no reference for this statement, just remember to have something like 
> this read in the past)

This is definitely true. Not sure if xev lets you pass in a window on
the commandline but if not it's trivial to hack it to snoop on say
keystrokes to any window. My ipmi-on-rpi uses exactly this trick to hook
keystrokes typed to the video player without having to patch the code.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web