Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GTK+ 3.8 Released With Support For Wayland

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the onward-and-upward dept.

GNOME 193

kthreadd writes "Version 3.8 of the GTK+ GUI framework has been released. A new feature in GTK+ 3.8 is support for Wayland 1.0, the display server that will replace X on free desktops. Among the other new features are improved support for theming, fixes to geometry management and improved accessibility. There is also better support for touch, as part of an ongoing effort in making GTK+ touch-aware."

cancel ×

193 comments

Replace X? (3, Insightful)

Great Big Bird (1751616) | about a year ago | (#43287945)

"A new feature in GTK+ 3.8 is support for Wayland 1.0, the display server that will replace X on free desktops." Who said this is going to replace X on 'free desktops'? As far as I have been hearing, this is just another in a long line and because it hasn't done it yet, it is not justifiable to say it will.

Re:Replace X? (2, Insightful)

armanox (826486) | about a year ago | (#43287981)

Agreed - it doesn't even do everything that X11 does. And some of us use those features.

Re:Replace X? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288093)

Please enlighten me, which feature are you using that is not supplied by Wayland?

Re:Replace X? (1)

armanox (826486) | about a year ago | (#43288165)

XDMCP

Some rumors. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288181)

I've been hearing some rumors about you, armanox. Now, now, don't fret! The rumors I've been hearing about you aren't bad at all! I'll just quit fucking around the bush and tell you what the rumors are: you want to fill my Bayer aspirin hole with your cum until I can't even so much as move without cum shooting out of my asshole as if it's a faucet. That was the rumor in full.

Besides informing you about the existence of this rumor, I have also come to tell you that my Bayer aspirin hole is wide open to you.

Re:Replace X? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about a year ago | (#43290219)

But doesn't Wayland run X, too?

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290855)

Yes, in the same sort of way that Windows and Linux can run each other through virtualization. But if you're going to all that trouble, what is the point, really? The reason for running Wayland over X is because X is ugly, old, crufty code and Wayland is supposed to be a cleaner redesign. So why stick all the old cruft of X right back on? At that point you might as well just ditch Wayland, because X already does everything Wayland will (from what I know).

Re:Replace X? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288005)

What is this "long line" you have been hearing of?

It consists of X, then Wayland.

It won't replace X on desktops for a long while, because there are lots of backwards compatibility requirements. It will supersede X, and X will continue to be used. Like OSX has done.

Re:Replace X? (5, Informative)

Jherek Carnelian (831679) | about a year ago | (#43288085)

What is this "long line" you have been hearing of?

It consists of X, then Wayland.

Just off the top of my head:

Y Window System - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_Window_System [wikipedia.org]
Berlin/Fresco - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresco_(windowing_system) [wikipedia.org]
Xynth - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xynth [wikipedia.org]
MicroXwin - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroXwin [wikipedia.org]
DirectFB - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directfb [wikipedia.org]
Mir - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_(display_server) [wikipedia.org]

Then there is whatever Android uses -- SurfaceFlinger?

Re:Replace X? (3, Informative)

JabberWokky (19442) | about a year ago | (#43288235)

To be fair, whatever Android uses -- and whatever TiVo and other embedded systems use -- are successful, and were never aimed at replacing X. They were aimed at providing graphical output strictly for their devices, and if they hit the market, did so nicely. Android's interface is used by a bunch of software these days.

The rest were all aimed at general desktop usage as a main priority, and absolutely you're right: X outlived them all. That doesn't imply that will always be the case, merely that it is much more difficult than most people think, for a wide variety of reasons.

There *does* seem to be much more momentum toward a change recently. It feels a bit like the XFree86 to XOrg leap era.

Re:Replace X? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#43290123)

To be fair, whatever Android uses -- and whatever TiVo and other embedded systems use -- are successful, and were never aimed at replacing X. They were aimed at providing graphical output strictly for their devices

Android is Linux without X and with a new GUI. In a very real way, whatever Android uses does replace X. Prior portable Linux systems have used X, and you could do what Android is doing with X.

Re:Replace X? (2)

wed128 (722152) | about a year ago | (#43290151)

Android is Linux without X...

And with a *completely* different userspace, and some scheduling patches (last i looked...have those been merged? will they be?)

Re:Replace X? (1)

styrotech (136124) | about a year ago | (#43288269)

I remember having high hopes for Berlin back in the day (back when I was naively optimistic hehe).

Re:Replace X? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288389)

None of those had the support Wayland has. Almost all of the important Xorg developers are working on and supporting Wayland.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289241)

Almost all of the important ACs support some new fangled thing! News at 11.

Re:Replace X? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289329)

The people who have been working on breaking X, you mean?

Back in XFree 4.0, we got support for DDC, aka "plug and play monitor". This is a protocol that allows the monitor to inform the computer about things like size and resolution, from which we get the DPI of the monitor, which is important to make things like fonts have the correct size on high DPI screens.

Around Xserver 1.7 (which is according to the new numbering system that was introduced after Xorg 7.0, they decided to do like XP, and just pretend all monitors are 96 DPI.

Shortly after that, Windows 7 (or Vista?) got support for reading the DPI from the monitor, like X.org used to be able to, and now we start seeing monitors in the 200 DPI area. Pretending a 200 DPI screen is 96 DPI will render everything at half size. Mostly unreadable without a magnifying glass. Meanwhile, Windows will render correctly on a 200 DPI screen, and X used to do so.

It is still possible to force the size in Xorg.conf, (after we thought we'd gotten rid of that file), and for a desktop PC that always has the same monitor, this works fine. But on a laptop, people will often have a big screen on their desk, and use the smaller screen on the go. That worked fine with DDC, back when only rich people had laptops, but when you force the size in Xorg.conf, you either need to buy a monitor with the same DPI as the laptop (try calculating the number of pixels on a 24 inch monitor at the DPI used in the Chromebook), or you'll be editing Xorg.conf every time.

Patches have been posted for reenabling DDC, even as an option, but the X.org developers refuse to merge these patches. Apparently they want to force us all to buy 96dpi monitors, or switch to Windows.

Those important X.org developers? I'm sure they'll do less damage to X by leaving for Wayland.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288473)

Actually I thought Android used SDML (Simple Direct Media Layer), but I might be wrong. ...actually I think I am wrong. It seems the Skia graphics engine is used on both Android and ChromeOS (Skia wrote the engine, and was acquired by Google in 2005).

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288787)

Oh. I thought we were talking about serious candidates to replace X. If you look at all those things, and just see a big jumble of confusing crap that all looks the same, and appears like they're all trying to randomly replace X, then it's no wonder you're confused about the state of affairs.

The reality is that Wayland/Weston is really the first serious effort to supersede X11 in the free software arena. And that includes support from many existing Xorg developers and GPU driver developers.

Re:Replace X? (1)

jrumney (197329) | about a year ago | (#43288021)

The thing about free desktops is that they are free to ignore Wayland and either stick with X, or go the Ubuntu way and do their own thing.

Re:Replace X? (2)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about a year ago | (#43290267)

The thing about free desktops is that they are free to ignore Wayland and either stick with X, or go the Ubuntu way and do their own thing.

Yes, free desktops are free to ignore Wayland and do their own thing. On the other hand, they are at the mercy of the distributions, such as Ubuntu, RedHat, Suse (and all the rest). Ubuntu is dropping X and not using Wayland and going with their own in house Mir, so those free desktops, if they want to run on Ubuntu will need to work with Mir. If Redhat goes with Wayland, as it appears it will be doing, then those free desktops will need to work with Wayland.

Or, they can go the Gnome route in which the developers have stated that they are going to shift from X to Wayland. Any distro that wants Gnome will need to provide Wayland.

And let's not forget the not so free video drivers. It's hard enough to get them to even support linux, but now they will need to support X, Wayland, Mir and who knows what.

My money is on whichever display server graphic cards write drivers for will be the winner. Of course, they are going to base their decision on which display server is going to see them selling more graphic cards.

But, as you say, the free desktops are free to ignore Wayland and do their own thing, even if that means their software won't run on any modern distributions anymore.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290987)

display server graphics cards

I don't know what kind of graphics cards you put in your servers (or why), but I'll bet whichever one wins is the one that works best with the nvidia proprietary drivers, for almost the same reason as you, except that I think the driving force will be the mass of Ubuntu users who just want to play TF2 on their laptops and will switch to something else if it doesn't work out for them.

Re:Replace X? (5, Informative)

Freshly Exhumed (105597) | about a year ago | (#43288051)

Poor summary. Wayland allows the running of X11 applications through an X server, with work being done to support this on Intel and AMD graphics:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2010-November/000292.html [freedesktop.org]

Re:Replace X? (2)

evilviper (135110) | about a year ago | (#43288581)

Wayland allows the running of X11 applications through an X server

Windows 7 allows the running of X11 graphics through an X server, too!

Thanks Xming and Cygwin developers!

Re:Replace X? (3, Interesting)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43288719)

The thing that pisses me and probably others off however is instead the likelyhood of wayland only apps which can't be run remotely like the X ones - then we may as well be on MS Windows.
If you have one fixed software licence for an occasionally used application in an office and it works with X you can just run it on the display of whoever wants it, but if you have the 1980s idea of a dumb local framebuffer you have to reserve a machine for that application and do hotseating. It's stepping back to the single user non-networked idea that was worn out before MSDOS was badly cloned as a cut down single user version of CP/M.
As for X bloat, it runs on Kindles FFS so that should show how stupid the bloat claim is. Would Wayland with gtk perform acceptably on something like a Kindle?

Re:Replace X? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288811)

Well all that does is demonstrate your ignorance of the subject.

There is nothing preventing wayland to be implemented with a remote renderer, and in fact one of the goals of the protocol is to allow efficient remoting (without hampering local drawing).

Seeing as the protocol is being explicitly designed to minimise round-trips, it has potential to be significantly more efficient than remote X.

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Wayland-prototype-for-rendering-software-that-runs-remotely-1715463.html

It's really pretty simple to educate yourself, which is a really good idea if you plan to rant about a subject on a public forum.

Re:Replace X? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289125)

An RDP clone is not anywhere near the same as remote X. For one thing, being "explicitly designed to minimise round-trips" does bupkiss for the performance of blasting bitmaps across the network. We can already get the same magnitude of performance improvements - and limitations - with X rendered to a local framebuffer that is then RDP'd over the network.

It's really pretty simple to educate yourself, which is a really good idea if you plan to rant about a subject on a public forum.

Right back at ya!

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290167)

> An RDP clone is not anywhere near the same as remote X.

Why not? People cry about this when it doesn't suit their usual rant, but actually it is very close to remote X.

> For one thing, being "explicitly designed to minimise round-trips" does bupkiss for the performance of blasting bitmaps across the network.

Yes it does. It significantly reduces the latency problem. Bandwidth is a far easier problem to solve, particularly for longer connections.

> We can already get the same magnitude of performance improvements - and limitations - with X rendered to a local framebuffer that is then RDP'd over the network.

The point is that it can and will work. The transfer protocol is being used is another story. It's not going to just be "blasting bitmaps", rather sending compressed deltas in a format that is not raw map of bits, but could be optimized for common desktop patterns.

> Right back at ya!

Not really. This is what you wrote:

> The thing that pisses me and probably others off however is instead the likelyhood of wayland only apps which can't be run remotely like the X ones

The likelihood of that is zero. Wayland protocol does not prohibit remoting, and there will certainly be remotable compositors. Next question.

Re:Replace X? (2, Interesting)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43289235)

Dumping a framebuffer into VNC is a really crappy alternative to X, so please apologise for your insult about my "ignorance" and "educating myself".

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290153)

Please apologise, hurrdurr. You seem to be under impression that X's way of doing thing is not crappy, eh? It's worse than VNC.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290441)

X is already dumping framebuffers across the network if you're using either GTK or Qt, and I suspect you are. Pretty much nothing uses the (ugly, very efficient) X primitives anymore.

Re:Replace X? (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43289395)

Wayland does not preclude a network transparent transport. Despite your aversion to framebuffers, that's exactly how most X apps draw themselves these days. They're not using X primitives, they're rendering themselves into surfaces using abstract drawing APIs like cairo.

So when you run a modern app over a network, X is just shifting chunks of bitmap around anyway. Producing something analogous for Wayland is hardly an insurmountable task, and in the meantime things like vnc exist. It's even possible that GTK / QT and other APIs could intelligently detect which backend to use, e.g. by looking at the DISPLAY variable and the app largely doesn't have to care. And if the app in question is not modern, e.g. it's an older GTK or hits X APIs directly then an X server can be run locally over Wayland to host it - but without requiring everyone else suffer the same overhead.

There is also a very good explanation [freedesktop.org] on the wayland site as to why X is so awful for performance which can be summarised as too much context switching. It would be worth reading it.

Re:Replace X? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43289765)

I read it some time ago and think that losing flexability is a high price for the supposed benefit of as yet unproven performance increases. Wayland needs to move towards "better as shown by these numbers" instead of a handwaving "will obviously be better at some point than X because it sucks".

in the meantime things like vnc exist

It was only a very short one line post above - why didn't you read it before replying?

VNC is one to one not many to one or one to many (3, Informative)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43289839)

VNC? What if more than one user wants to use something on the remote machine? It's the age of the "cloud" where you can get a 64 core machine for around $9k, hook it up to fast storage and let a lot of people use it for very complex tasks. What is someone want to run things on multiple machines and doesn't want to juggle half a dozen full "desktops"? Sod this MSDOS single user non-networked approach - it's 2013 FFS!
Also that block diagram implies speed hits from the complexity and ignores that the wayland server+compositor is going to be doing a similar number of things internally as both the X server and compositor, so it doesn't prove your point and I doubt the person that drew it intended it to be used to try to prove that point.
It's been a long time and a lot of claims - why no benchmarks for identical task yet instead of handwaving and "X sux!!11!"

Re:VNC is one to one not many to one or one to man (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#43290111)

VNC? What if more than one user wants to use something on the remote machine?

They they start another Xvnc process.

What is someone want to run things on multiple machines and doesn't want to juggle half a dozen full "desktops"?

Yes, that is a real problem.

Re:VNC is one to one not many to one or one to man (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43290655)

What is someone want to run things on multiple machines and doesn't want to juggle half a dozen full "desktops"?

I wonder for how many people this scenario would even apply though, or why it should mean the experience in a Linux desktop should be hampered by X11 just to facilitate it.

Re:VNC is one to one not many to one or one to man (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43291097)

Removing features because they aren't used by the average case (or because the developer doesn't want to support them) is not really acceptable. It shows that the Wayland devs are focusing only on their impression of the Desktop case.

Most users use EXT3/4 or BTRFS. Does this mean support for filesystems like JFS should be dropped?

Re:VNC is one to one not many to one or one to man (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290595)

For me, it's very simple: if there is no X11 on Linux, I'll stop using Linux. X11 is more important to me than Linux. Apparently, lessons with GNOME 3 have not been learned.

Re:VNC is one to one not many to one or one to man (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43290639)

VNC only restricts you to one session on windows. On Linux you can have one XVnc session per person if you liked. Or if the remote machine has X, then run a rootless X11 server over Wayland and run apps like you always have (just because your machine is Wayland doesn't mean the machine hosting the executable does). There'll probably be a vnc server running over Wayland too at some point, as well as a proper network protocol for Wayland.

Most of the objections raised about network transparency seem pretty silly IMO. Network transparent apps are a niche feature even in Linux and there are alternatives even in the short term, not to mention longer term possibilities.

Re:Replace X? (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about a year ago | (#43290293)

The thing that pisses me and probably others off however is instead the likelyhood of wayland only apps which can't be run remotely like the X ones - then we may as well be on MS Windows.
If you have one fixed software licence for an occasionally used application in an office and it works with X you can just run it on the display of whoever wants it, but if you have the 1980s idea of a dumb local framebuffer you have to reserve a machine for that application and do hotseating. It's stepping back to the single user non-networked idea that was worn out before MSDOS was badly cloned as a cut down single user version of CP/M.
As for X bloat, it runs on Kindles FFS so that should show how stupid the bloat claim is. Would Wayland with gtk perform acceptably on something like a Kindle?

Would your Kindle allow you to run remote X sessions? You can't say the problem with Wayland is that you can't run remote X sessions and then use the Kindle a support for X as it doesn't let you run remote X session, either.

Re:Replace X? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288057)

Because XFree86 / Xorg still performs like it's running on a circa 1993 dumb 1MB frame buffer. Video memory *is* actually useful for storing surfaces, rather than asking an application to redraw every time it's obscured/unobscured by anything. It's literally painful to use. Yes, literally.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288137)

and wayland performs like it isnt running on anything

zing

Re:Replace X? (0)

epyT-R (613989) | about a year ago | (#43288169)

Hence the compositor extension. Now you have a choice.. Party like it's 2013 or 1993. some of us like the idea of a fallback so that our gpus aren't lagged by a bunch of desktop bs while in a fullscreen application or game.

Re:Replace X? (1)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#43288303)

Because XFree86 / Xorg still performs like it's running on a circa 1993 dumb 1MB frame buffer. Video memory *is* actually useful for storing surfaces, rather than asking an application to redraw every time it's obscured/unobscured by anything. It's literally painful to use. Yes, literally.

I guess you never heard of X11 backing store. We were using that back in 1993.

Re:Replace X? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288491)

Yeah. The advantages of Wayland are actually pretty esoteric, if the goal is "I want to draw shit to my screen fast and efficiently". People think X is some clunking mess, and yet it was playing videos on computers 20 years ago.

What X is, is old. And developers are bored with it. And they want something new and shiny and a chance to play with the hardware without abstraction throwing a wet blanket over their benchmark scores.

The benchmark of success for Wayland is that _users_ don't actually notice that anything changed. They'll fall short of that benchmark because too many people like using X11, and even the backward compatibility inevitably will cause headaches.

But developers will enjoy it more, and in the FOSS world those are the only consumers that matter.

Re:Replace X? (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43289653)

What X is, is a heap of arcane apis which nobody uses and a raft of extensions that have popped up over time to make it cope with the modern world. It's inefficient, complex (since clients must explicitly code for exensions with fallback behaviour). Proposing to get rid of it is not "esoteric" or "boredom", it's rational and pragmatic.

And yes I'd like my desktop to "draw shit to my screen fast and efficiently". Doing away with X11 will facilitate that. And for people who "like using X11" can continue to do so - over Wayland. Or they can spin their own dist which bans Wayland entirely and remains on X11.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290099)

You will be surprised. If that policy is, indeed, adopted, I think that Linux will fade into obscurity. There are alternatives to Linux but there are not alternatives to X11 as of now. Personally, I'll rather switch to OpenSolaris then stop using X11. GNOME 3 should have been a good lesson to every overly keen system architect. Apparently, the lessons have not been learned.

Re:Replace X? (1)

wed128 (722152) | about a year ago | (#43290199)

GNOME 3 does some things different then gnome 2. It's also clean and usable. I don't understand the public distaste for it...works for me! I'm sure there are others.

Re:Replace X? (3, Informative)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43290105)

What X is, is a heap of arcane apis which nobody uses

Bullshit. You ahve no idea what you're talking about.

What you *think* you're talking about is the font mechanism, which few people use any more. Oh the horror, X has a small unpopular part in the core protocol.

I guess it will take up kilobytes of space on disk while the unused code sits paged out.

Perhaps you're thinking of the drawing mechanism? Only some parts are unused. When coupled with the XRender extension it works just fine, and the two work together.

The reparenting mechanism is still used. The window manipulation mechanisms are still used. The remoting is still used. The elegant (and yes, it is elegant if you actually take the time to figure it out) copy/paste and now DnD mechanism is still used. The input basic mechanism is still used for most things. The screensaver mechanism works just fine.

And so on.

Basically most of it is just fine and for some reason people kile you get their knickers in a twist about an old protocol call which is not much used any more.

It's inefficient, complex (since clients must explicitly code for exensions with fallback behaviour).

So... your solution for requiring clients keep massive backwards compatibility is to break backwards compatibility. Okay, but you could jus tnot code clients with backwards compatibility to non extended X as well. Did that even occur to you?

Okey dokey. So it's not OK if you do it with X but it is OK if you do it with Wayland. I sense the FUD is strong in this one.

Proposing to get rid of it is not "esoteric" or "boredom", it's rational and pragmatic.

Basically the only thing people seem to coherently complain about is the little used and unloved font mechanism in X. Removing that is certainly worth losing remoting for!

And yes I'd like my desktop to "draw shit to my screen fast and efficiently". Doing away with X11 will facilitate that.

You are apparently not aware that X supports direct rendering and so has been able to "draw shit efficiently" for quite a long time now. Switching to Wayland won't change the rendering path.

The only efficiency improvement is that you input events will go from kernel->wayland->program not kernel->X->WM->X->program. If that has measurable latency then you're running on a 386 (good luck---it's out of support for Linux now) and rendering is the least of your worries.

And for people who "like using X11" can continue to do so - over Wayland.

FUD ATTACK!!! This has been rebutted many times including by me (again) elsewhere in this thread.

Re:Replace X? (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43290569)

Perhaps you're thinking of the drawing mechanism? Only some parts are unused. When coupled with the XRender extension it works just fine, and the two work together.

Huge swathes of X are obsolete or unused, glyphs, logical fonts, rendering primitives, codemaps, and more. The fact you mention XRender means you recognize how obsolete X11 is yet all that shit must be implemented all the same.

So... your solution for requiring clients keep massive backwards compatibility is to break backwards compatibility. Okay, but you could jus tnot code clients with backwards compatibility to non extended X as well. Did that even occur to you?

I can't even parse that. If you want backwards compatibility, install and run X11. Otherwise what do you mean? Most apps have minimal dependencies on raw X. There might be some which tap an API, or implicitly get stuck on X through GLX or similar. But most call GTK or QT. Moving to a different display server is a matter of changing some compiler and linker parameters.

The only efficiency improvement is that you input events will go from kernel->wayland->program not kernel->X->WM->X->program. If that has measurable latency then you're running on a 386 (good luck---it's out of support for Linux now) and rendering is the least of your worries.

No it isn't. The composition path would be more efficient too. There are diagrams on the wayland site which demonstrate why it is more efficient. Maybe go look at them.

FUD ATTACK!!! This has been rebutted many times including by me (again) elsewhere in this thread.

No, it's reality. You can use X11 over Wayland or go make your own distribution fork where it's pure X11 all the way through.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289779)

No X was designed for the LEAST USED CASE.

Unix/Linux has been burdened by a system whose design was optimised for the smallest part of the user base. As a result, it's been slow to develop and has piss poor performance.

Windows avoided all that shit... and STILL has remote access systems that perform better than X. Why? It's because most stuff that X does remotely these days (due to a modern graphical desktop) involves shoving bitmaps across the network (but in little parts)... just what the windows solution does. Wayland is a solution that offers remote desktops AND can run an embedded X server if required.

Put simply, the X zealots who claim that X has some advantages in remote desktops are deranged loons who remind my of the worst kind of audiophiles.

Re:Replace X? (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#43289635)

X11 has extensions that shift all the damage and recomposition out to hardware, but it requires jumping through inordinate hoops which impact on performance, e.g. passing messages around between processes which increases latency from additional context switching. Basically X is a bottle neck in the middle mostly handing off tasks to extensions these days.

Re:Replace X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288071)

"Who said this is going to replace X on 'free desktops'?"
You mean other than the X devs?

Re:Replace X? (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about a year ago | (#43288193)

Isn't Wayland aimed for the mobile market as a light-weight replacement for X? So on Desktops, where you want to support many graphics devices and features like X-Forwarding, you will want to stick with X (unless you already follow a cross-device distro using e.g. Unity).

Re:Replace X? (2)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about a year ago | (#43288363)

Actually Wayland is just a fix to a non-issue. There was a perceived issue quite some time ago, but that was fixed. Wayland is little more than a "Going out of Business" sign on a furniture store. There must be good deals in there!!! Wayland is not X and I've heard that this thing I use daily that works near perfectly is horrible so Wayland must be good.

Re:Replace X? (2)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#43288703)

Not light-weight in that respect, the main difference is it doesn't draw anything. Each application has to render its own window complete with decorations, then tell Wayland where to find it. The only thing Wayland does is to combine them, like if you have overlapping windows, transparency, transitions or 3D effects. So it should be able to handle multiple graphics devices, multiple monitors and all that locally. What it doesn't have is any forwarding, since shared buffers are inherently local and it has no knowledge of the rendering commands so it can't send a rendering stream.

Even in theory it's not so easy to know if you should render something locally or remotely, for example complex 3D application that use lots of textures and such you want to render locally, then send the finished window to the client. But say if you're a terminal server for 100 clients that want to run apps and all these are proper desktops with graphics card maybe you want to send OpenGL commands and render client side. Or maybe not again, if there are thin clients. And it probably depends on what the available bandwidth is. Personally I think web applications are far more suited to the task, if you need to access it remotely and it doesn't have a web interface then it's going to be some form of screen scraping.

Re:Replace X? (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43289293)

Not light-weight in that respect, the main difference is it doesn't draw anything. Each application has to render its own window complete with ***decorations***,

And it's a really fucking stupid idea (tm).

Actually it's not even a Wayland idea per-se. There is no reason -at all- that client side decorations need to be done by Wayland: it's entirely possible to get the compositor to draw them.

For some reason, however the Wayland developers policy is client decorations. It seems that they've been so blinded by their hatred for X (seriously checkout some of the FUD they've been spewing) that they're determined tothrow out all the good features as well as the bad ones.

Re:Replace X? (1)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#43290719)

Actually it's not even a Wayland idea per-se. There is no reason -at all- that client side decorations need to be done by Wayland: it's entirely possible to get the compositor to draw them. For some reason, however the Wayland developers policy is client decorations.

Right now I'm browsing in Chrome on Win7, where the top window bar is full of tabs so where do the client decorations start and end? One of the main complaints I hear about CSD is that a frozen application will also freeze the windows, but you have a compositor - you can have a key combo show a pop-up menu to minimize/move the window or kill the application etc. - your options are very static if it's not responding. The other big one is consistency, but I'm not sure if you're better off just having Gtk+/Qt applications have a standard way to ask for the standard window decorations and render it themselves or have the compositor do it. Those that do something special will just ask for an undecorated window and do their own thing anyway.

Re:Replace X? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43288677)

Y do you think so :)

Just in time! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287969)

Just in time before everyone drops GTK+ for Qt!

*ducks*

My question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43287973)

Did they break theme compatibility yet again?

Re:My question (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year ago | (#43288133)

Has there been a Gtk release where theme compatibility was the only thing that broke? That sounds amazing!

(Why yes, I do write Gtk apps for a living, how did you know?)

You can replace my X (3, Funny)

RightwingNutjob (1302813) | about a year ago | (#43287979)

when you pry it from my cold, dead, fingers!

Re:You can replace my X (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288109)

when you pry it from my cold, dead, fingers!

I agree. If Fedora switches to Wayland, I will switch to CentOS. I have a NVidia card and I don't want to use any Nouveau crap. X11 will stay on my PC. Linux might not, but X11 will.

Tail wags the Dog (0)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#43288349)

I have a NVidia card and I don't want to use any Nouveau crap. X11 will stay on my PC. Linux might not, but X11 will.

Except NVidia is swimming upstream with their binary drivers, and its excuses to the world are looking extremely shaky, when its competitors are open source; its bad business now Linux is the becoming the dominant OS and Google clearly favour hardware they can fix. Personally Its nice to see most Linux users moving to intel.

Re:Tail wags the Dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288783)

Personally Its nice to see most Linux users moving to intel.

Hah, like every fscking time I've run any linux distro on an box with Intel graphics, I've suffered all sorts of unexplained graphics 'weirdies' (ranging from transient blocks of random colours through to full machine lock-up) when any software has the temerity to try and hammer the supposed OpenGL support..

Ok, maybe I'm behind the times, maybe they've fixed all that crap in the past couple of years and I've not been arsed to find out, all I'll say is all my machines run with NVidia cards and binary drivers, and get on with doing their jobs without frigging problems.

Re:Tail wags the Dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288807)

I have a NVidia card and I don't want to use any Nouveau crap. X11 will stay on my PC. Linux might not, but X11 will.

Except NVidia is swimming upstream with their binary drivers, and its excuses to the world are looking extremely shaky, when its competitors are open source; its bad business now Linux is the becoming the dominant OS and Google clearly favour hardware they can fix. Personally Its nice to see most Linux users moving to intel.

Problem is that their binary drivers are of much better quality than any of the alternatives. I tried with Noveau, I really did. It was breaking down during suspend. There were inexplicable slowdowns with image rendering in my browser. And mplayrer, too. Simply, the experience with the binary drivers is much better. I don't have any problems installing NVidia drivers and I will continue using them, if not with Linux, then with something else. Linux may give up X11, but I will not. There is also OpenSolaris for Intel. I gave up GNOME when they came up with version 3, I will easily give up Linux if I cannot use X11. It's that important. An idea to force the users to move away from X11 may actually sound a death knell of Linux, just like GNOME 3 marked the sudden end of the GNOME interface. XFCE is working just as fine.

Re:You can replace my X (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288359)

X ppl need to chill. The first time you see an official release of Wayland it will be running X apps via a Wayland based X server. Get a grip.

Re:You can replace my X (1)

Alex Belits (437) | about a year ago | (#43288773)

The problem is not X applications in Wayland, it's Wayland applications anywhere beyond Wayland developers' desktops. We don't want them, we want all applications working in X, with all X capabilities. Hell, we wanted Windows applications in X, and Wine runs them in X better than Wayland applications that won't run anywhere but in Wayland. Wayland out-Microsofted Microsoft in breaking other people's software, and it's not even released yet.

Re:You can replace my X (1)

wed128 (722152) | about a year ago | (#43290233)

And what stops you from writing a wayland renderer for X? Wine runs GDI programs under X, why not have some Wayland API shim that does the same thing?

Re:You can replace my X (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about a year ago | (#43289691)

You can replace my ex when you pry me from her cold, dead fingers!

Wayland Initial release :2008 (3, Funny)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year ago | (#43288129)

the display server that will replace X on free desktops!

yea I know it takes some time to get stuff right, but call me when this thing gets out of duke nukem forever mode k

thanks

Re:Wayland Initial release :2008 (0)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about a year ago | (#43288373)

It's quite the opposite of the DNF issue. DNF was promised for over a decade, then delivered a petered out version. Wayland was release as a useless version that has petered for almost a decade.

Re:Wayland Initial release :2008 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289559)

call me when this thing gets out of duke nukem forever mode k

OK, consider yourself called. Version 1.0.6 was released last week: http://wayland.freedesktop.org/releases.html

GTK+ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288305)

It seems like GTK+ is thriving despite Gnome 3. Is this the case?

Re:GTK+ (2)

innocent_white_lamb (151825) | about a year ago | (#43288495)

I haven't used gtk+ much (for my own programming, that is) but I do use glib. A lot. God's gift to C programmers: glib.

Its Better Than That (0)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#43288509)

It seems like GTK+ is thriving despite Gnome 3. Is this the case?

Gnome 3 is wonderful....Gnome shell on the other hand (even with extensions) is poor, with cinnamon, it is better than ever, the applications are all coming along nicely, the only one suffering the gnome scalpel is nautilus (and some of it is justified)...and well there is Nemo for that too.

sigh (3, Informative)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43288467)

Yet more "waaah, they're taking my X remoting!" crap. Wayland will enable an X server to run on top of it just like Windows does, just like OS X does - whilst enabling a far more efficient and modern rendering pipeline.

Re:sigh (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288575)

I don't want X like Windows or OS X. That sucks. That also breaks forward compatibility with new applications. I want X like Unix. If Ubuntu switches to Mir and Fedora to Wayland I will switch to a Linux distribution which does not suck. Also, the claim that Wayland enables a far more efficient rendering pipeline is just bullshit. Everyhing Wayland can do could be done equalliy well within X (as they fully admit in their FAQ), which was a really well designed protocol. You know: extendable.

Re:sigh (3, Interesting)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43288615)

Being able to make X do something, and doing something without the last 20 years of brain damage are two entirely different things.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43288897)

Being able to make X do something, and doing something without the last 20 years of brain damage are two entirely different things.

There is not a day where the desktop guys don't break something that used to be a reason to use linux. I don't want a fancy windows desktop replacement. There are also people who seem to be able to work (understand) the protocol (enlightenment). I'll like to keep a linux production system and it doesn't need fancy effects. It needs to work. Stop breaking stuff.

Re:sigh (1)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43289109)

Maybe if the rendering pipeline was abstracted properly into well defined layers, shit wouldn't break when functionality was added.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289245)

It's all fun and games as long as the remoting works perfectly, especially in root windowless mode. TBH no one cares who it's technically achieved in the future. That's something many people misunderstood in the previous discussions about Mir and Wayland.

Having the ability to remote any application is mandature feature and lack of it will be instant blocker level issue. The support for that platform will drop significantly and for good. If remoting works out of the box by the power of some duct tape and paper clips then who cares.

The problem is that Mir and Wayland people haven't been communicating this very well. They should tell that they promise that remoting will always work out of the box, although making it technically perfect will never be a goal, and they would find a lot of more support for their project.

Re:sigh (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43289543)

So what's brain-damaged about X?

The font system. Not used much by modern code. Not brain damage, since it does not get in the way.

The drawing system---oh wait, once it's been augmneted with the XRender extension it still works pretty well.

The copy/paste/Xdnd system? Works great.

Window management scheme? Best in existence.

Remoting? Pretty decent and in need of some minor updates---but most programs written against it are brain damaged. Xlib is partly at fault, but Xcb solves the peoblems. Nothing fundemental wrong with the protocol there.

Etc?

So og on, what IS brain-damaged about X?

And I'm talking about X, not badly written toolkits and programs.

And I'm talking about brain-damage. $FOO needs an extension is ont brain damage, it's good design becuase X was built with that in mind---extensions are in the core protocol!

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289979)

It's not designed for touch based tablets.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290941)

...second system effect.

I fully expect wayland to ruin window management at least (like Ubuntu/Unity did), so I hope there's a WaylandNest that runs under X.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289381)

Efficient rendering pipeline? As I understand it, Wayland requires a gamer graphics card to basically do anything.

X runs fine on an ET6000 or even older.

Re:sigh (3, Interesting)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43289343)

Oh jeez more of the "oh but you can run X on Wayland" crap.

sure, you can eat a shit sandwich too, but it won't be very palatable.

Wayland will enable an X server to run on top of it just like Windows does, just like OS X does

Yeah, and we al know how well that works...

It's terrible. X is very much second class. Here are all the things that don't work:

* Copy/paste of more than text between X and non X
* Remoting of non X windows
* Drag and drop from X to non X
* Pleasant window management of non X windows

whilst enabling a far more efficient and modern rendering pipeline.

Evidence needed, and biased FUD from the Wayland team doesn't cut it.

X has supported direct i.e. nothing in the way rendering for ages now and that is very efficient.

Compositing window managers require a whole extra 2 socket round trips to the kernel *PER MOUSE MOVE*. Given that the kernel has a latency of positively micrseconds this is clearly a big blow for X /sarcasm.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290069)

X on Quartz (OS X) actually works quite well. Copy/paste is not an issue.

Re:sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289363)

Wayland will enable an X server to run on top of it just like Windows does

And making it usefull will be as easy as getting DISPLAY=:0 OUTLOOK.EXE to work. So far, nobody has been able to do it.

Thanks Canonical (1, Insightful)

angryfeet (2876521) | about a year ago | (#43288777)

If not for the announcement of Mir, this would have taken at least 5 years

Re:Thanks Canonical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290549)

You mean it would have taken another 5 years.

Re:Thanks Canonical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290819)

And will be utterly useless, should Canonical really have the support of nVidia for Mir as they claim. Wayland will never be decently usable without binary blob drivers. OpenGL without those proprietary drivers just isn't there :(.

Poking interface (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289467)

Great, another useful product that's suddenly being overtaken by the need to add an interface for people who wish to poke their computer with their fingers rather than do anythign useful. Adding touch to everything seems to make it turn awful.

Re:Poking interface (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43289561)

Everything is going touch. If GTK+ would not embrace touch then no one would use GTK+ in a couple of years. It's all about adapting to a changing reality.

Damage done (0)

mongrol (200050) | about a year ago | (#43289837)

Doesn't matter. GTK dev's (and GNOME dev's) can't be trusted. I'll use QT from here on.

Re:Damage done (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about a year ago | (#43290327)

Doesn't matter. GTK dev's (and GNOME dev's) can't be trusted. I'll use QT from here on.

Didn't QT announce support for Wayland, too?

Why not build an OpenGL Backend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290115)

If they don't really like X, then why not build an OpenGL GTK Backend.
It would run directly on X with direct rendering support, thus bypassing the X server
and would also run on Windows, OSX, Android, Simbian, etc.

WTF!? (0)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | about a year ago | (#43290315)

WTF!?

GTK+ 3.8 has added support for Wayland, it hasn't dropped support for X11. You people need to quit bashing everything GTK/Gnome.

I swear, every time I read "Wayland" I think: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290531)

Someone should fork a new distro called "Wayland-Youtanni"

It should have a GUI named Ripley, a poorly defined, needlessly complicated quasi-hierarchical file system manager that has a tendency to ramble as well as ignore your explanation for suspicious events, and a very powerful antivirus system that upon detecting an intrusion or infection pops up with an "Option 3: It's the only way to be sure" message.

Gtk adds support for a subset of one OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43290591)

Call me impressed.

Ubuntu is going another way. Some distros will stick on X unless Wayland takes off. Wayland is Linux only. Every unix system will run X.

Linux folks... it's obvious you don't want to copy Unix anymore.. please just get it over with and declare that. Don't pretend to be in the fold.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...