Beta
×

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!

Wayland 1.4 Released — Touch, Sub-Surface Protocol, Crop/Scale Support

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the onward-and-upward dept.

Open Source 128

An anonymous reader writes "Version 1.4 of the Wayland protocol and Weston reference compositor have been released. The Wayland/Weston 1.4 release delivers on many features and includes promoting the sub-surface protocol to official Wayland, improved touch screen support, a crop/scale protocol within Weston, security improvements, and other fixes."

cancel ×

128 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (5, Funny)

Tailhook (98486) | about 8 months ago | (#46061911)

Just to preclude about half of the coming threads.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062229)

And the best thing is that X is no longer network transparent, it's network capable in a way similar to vnc. With the current rendering methods (shm and dri2) you no longer send commands, you send image buffers.
Here, listen what a X developer has to say about that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44#t=1111 [youtube.com]

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062697)

the same fuckers behind wayland are the exact same developers who fucked up X11 by trying to move it to sending image buffers instead of primatives, and then once broken they walked away leaving it broken, then point at X11 as being broken as a reason to use wayland instead.

it's fucking rich. fuck them and fuck that insincere and antisocial behavior. they can have wayland for iPad like graphics if they want, and I applaud them for that. More power to them and I wish the project well. But for poisoning X11's pool before they left by making changes that assume everybody is desktop and mobile users who want the eye candy and no one does any real work anymore? For that they deserve all the scorn they have gotten.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46063085)

Yeah, I hear you brother! Thankfully, now they're gone, we can roll back all their shit and go back to rendering everything as primitives.

Oh wait.

That's not going to happen because it's retarded.

Defining new primitives at runtime (1)

tepples (727027) | about 8 months ago | (#46064393)

the [team] behind wayland are the exact same developers who [messed] up X11 by trying to move it to sending image buffers instead of primatives

It was either that or include a virtual machine of some sort in the X server so that new primitives could be defined, much as HTML5 does with JavaScript and the 2D canvas API. How would you have preferred to implement that? At least image buffers are slightly less likely to cause a security hole than a Lua, Forth, Java, JavaScript, or whatever VM.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

OdinOdin_ (266277) | about 8 months ago | (#46066189)

Bollox, the developers of X11 are over 30years older now. I think you are confusing the current maintainers of the two most popular X11 implementations with the actual developers who came up with the original ideas. The extensions over the past 15 year rise of Linux popularity have had to restrict themselves to the design choices made over 30 years so. It is plenty overdue a revamp, silicon has changed to much in that time.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (4, Insightful)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 8 months ago | (#46063359)

All I want is to ssh -C -X and open remote apps and use them like local ones, seamless cutting and pasting. It is quite handy in a LAN. Remote desktop preserving state is useful for monitoring, this is useful for office work. Different scenarios.

So, the race now is between new faster compositors who need X protocols layered for compatibility and features and javascript obfuscated apps replacing networked native applications...

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

Uecker (1842596) | about 8 months ago | (#46063737)

Sigh, this gets old. I use it everyday and it works! So yes, it is network transparent.

Re: OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065367)

Are you saying you can't tell when you are remote or local? Or that it is working the same way underneath? At least one would be needed to be network transparent.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1, Troll)

jedidiah (1196) | about 8 months ago | (#46063793)

> And the best thing is that X is no longer network transparent, it's network capable in a way similar to vnc

Then why is VNC so god-damned awful in comparison? Even on a fast local wired network VNC sucks great big donkey balls. VNC on a local network is less usable than either RDP or X (with compression) are across the Internet.

The disaster that is VNC on MacOS is why I find the idea of Wayland so repugnant.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 8 months ago | (#46065579)

VNC is highly dependent on how clever/fast your image scraping and compression is. The TigerVNC client connecting over a LAN to a TightVNC windows server is so much faster then some of the other clients its unbelievable. Even over the net it's much quicker then others (TemaViewer's VNC client is terrible).

The problem is very much "how quickly can you get a copy of the pixels" "how quickly can you compress them" and "how many screen sections do you need to update".

The slightly disappointing thing (or thing I've not been able to establish one-way or the other about Wayland) is that there doesn't seem to be any interface for a client application to signal the compositor that it's updating just a small portion of the screen, rather then whole thing.

VNC could easily be configured to run as a client and serve just a specific window over the net (with the benefit that you could create it as a normal desktop X window, hide it while it's being remotely served, and then bring it back to the local X session) - but the server software to do this just isn't there yet. Wayland certainly seems like it'll make it a heck of a lot easier to write *good* client software like this.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 8 months ago | (#46065585)

Follow up: And it looks like sub-surface support is exactly what I was just complaining about - a way to update small portions of your window and tell the compositor that's what you're doing. Make your editing windows subsurfaces and only send the necessary updates.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

sjames (1099) | about 8 months ago | (#46065231)

I have NEVER seen an X app that wouldn't run just fine over the net and neatly appear on my desktop as if it were running there. Can you name one?

Unlike vnc, it doesn't make me display the whole desktop in a window and then the app window within that. It also doesn't require an X server on the remote side. If the app uses a tray icon, that works normally as well.

It's trivially easy to do all of that through sh as well for ease and security. When Wayland is up to that, give me a call.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#46065685)

I have NEVER seen an X app that wouldn't run just fine over the net and neatly appear on my desktop as if it were running there. Can you name one?

Anything which uses OpenGL has about a 50:50 chance of working at all, and an even lower chance of working correctly. The protocol allows for it, but it just doesn't work most of the time.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46066375)

Bullshit. I've been using OpenGL stuff remotely since the late 90s with hardly any problems I can remember - and nearly all of those were due to cheap video hardware that hardly anyone has used in the last decade.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#46066445)

Well, I've been trying it since the late 90s and it's been seriously hit-or-miss, even on mainstream hardware.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

Trogre (513942) | about 8 months ago | (#46065289)

Oh dear.

Look, I don't care whether or not X technically has pure network transparency any more. All I and just about every other multi-system-Linux user want is to ssh to another computer and have individual programs launched from that shell show up on my screen as if I was sitting at the remote computer.

If Wayland does that then there's no problem.

X does this right now, though admittedly these days addons like xpra are needed to make it usable over slow links.

Re:OMG NO NETWORK TRANPARENCY!!!1 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065663)

As long as ssh -X doesn't work, it's a no-go for Wayland. I don't care HOW it is implemented though!

I'm cautiously optimistic, but not ready yet (3, Interesting)

Khopesh (112447) | about 8 months ago | (#46061977)

It's a small step forward. From the release notes [freedesktop.org] ,

The wayland repository continues to mature and moves slowly. This cycle again only saw a few wayland changes, most of which where fairly unexciting:

- SHM Buffer SIBGUS protection. We added and couple of utility functions to help compositors guard against broken or malicious clients who could truncate the backing file for shm buffers and thus trigger SIGBUS in the compositor (Neil Roberts).

- Subsurfaces protocol moved to wayland repo and as such promoted to official wayland protocol (Pekka Paalanen).

- wl_proxy_set_queue() can take a NULL queue to reset back to default queue. (Neil Roberts).

- A few bug fixes, in particular, I'd like highlight the fix for the race between wl_proxy_create() and wl_proxy_marshal().

- A few scanner error message improvements and documentation tweaks and polish.

I'm hoping the Maui Project [maui-project.org] (which uses Wayland [slashdot.org] ) can continue to gain momentum as Wayland does and that it becomes a viable option in the next few years.

Re:I'm cautiously optimistic, but not ready yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062701)

I'd have a lot more confidence in the Maui Project if their web page didn't have a relatively useless 2,446px × 1,322px PNG (1mb) on their home page. For some reason FF isn't caching it either so it just crawls onto the page. Not a good sign.

Re:I'm cautiously optimistic, but not ready yet (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064389)

So they say GNOME has too little configuration options, and KDE has too much confusing options. Their UI is similar to just about every other UI out there in free desktop land, except maybe the icons are different. You could theoretically, just create a KDE distribution (since they like QT) and then jsut programmatically create a good default and then a good theme and call it good. No need to change anything.

Mint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065073)

That's been done. It's called Linux Mint.

OMG UBUNTU! 3 monitors?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46061997)

3+ monitor support??

Wayland! (-1, Troll)

fisted (2295862) | about 8 months ago | (#46062033)

Wayland! The same group of Prople behind IDevices Chromebooks KDBUS Wayland Gnome3 Pulseaudio Systemd Journald Alienating Udev Alienating 95% of their Userbase

Re:Wayland! (-1, Redundant)

fisted (2295862) | about 8 months ago | (#46062041)

Fatfinger!

The same group of Prople behind

Wayland
IDevices
Chromebooks
KDBUS
Wayland
Gnome3
Pulseaudio
Systemd
Journald
Alienating Udev
Alienating 95% of their Userbase

FTFM

Re:Wayland! (1)

Laxori666 (748529) | about 8 months ago | (#46062125)

Fix the fucking manual? Fixed that for manual? First Time Film Makers? Florida Thoroughbred Farm Managers? I don't understand. WTF R U TRYING TO SAY MAN.

Re:Wayland! (5, Funny)

gazbo (517111) | about 8 months ago | (#46062151)

Ah now to be fair, pulseaudio wasn't all bad. In its early mainstream (Fedora 12?) days, when I had audio problems, I knew that I could always type `killall pulseaudio` and reliably solve them.

So...there's that.

Re:Wayland! (2)

bankman (136859) | about 8 months ago | (#46065359)

Today's moderators don't seem to have a clue, the above post is not funny but deeply insightful.

X forwarding-like feature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062053)

Will Wayland have a "X forwarding" kind of feature?

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062107)

No.

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062147)

Remote desktop still works without x forwarding. VNC and other technologies are available just like Windows works fine without X forwarding as well.

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062193)

Yay, a step backwards for the sake of appearing to move forwards, all hail Lennart!

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46063503)

Oh, don't be hard on Lennart. He's a damn good programmer, and the technical implementations he comes up with are often times leagues better than anything else out there.

The problem is, he only creates implementations of shit nobody wants.

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064395)

What does Lennart have to do with this? Jeez, you're ready to accuse him of breaking X now?

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (1)

bankman (136859) | about 8 months ago | (#46065371)

I am pretty sure he will slip a systemd dependency into wayland somehow. Wayland is developed by xorg developers and will eventually replace xorg, so yes. :-)

VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062459)

My god, have you ever had to use VNC? It shits buckets of vomit even over excellent LAN connections. You can literally put a two-foot crossover cable between one powerful desktop system and another, use optimized VNC clients and servers with the optimal settings, and yet still get a godawful experience.

Yet back in the early 1990s we could use X apps on our Sun workstations from our New York office, even when they were running on systems in California and Texas. This was without any delay, on computers that make smartwatches look like supercomputers, over shitty ISDN connections.

VNC in early 2014 still can't reliably replicate the excellent experience X provided back in 1992, for crying out loud. If VNC can't do it after decades of trying, why the fuck should I believe that the Wayland crew can pull it off with only a few years of effort?

Shut the fuck up (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062487)

Please.

It's VNC-like, not VNC. VNC sucks donkey balls, but that's because it's done in an absolutely insane way where it actually does continuous screen-grabs (of the whole screen), encodes them as JPGs and then sends them over the wire.

The wayland version of this is much, much less braindead.

Re:Shut the fuck up (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#46062709)

VNC sucks donkey balls, but that's because it's done in an absolutely insane way where it actually does continuous screen-grabs (of the whole screen), encodes them as JPGs and then sends them over the wire.

No, it doesn', unless you have a really, really braindead implementation which doesn't track which pixels have changedt. But don't let not knowing what you're talking about interfere with your rant.

X's way is the only feasible way. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062821)

You're right on the mark. This is why the Wayland attempt is going to fail. They're going to do what the VNC crowd has already tried, and they're going to fail in exactly the same way. There's only one correct way to do this, and that's the way that X did it. Either you do it the same way as X and succeed, or you do it any other way and fail miserably.

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (5, Informative)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 8 months ago | (#46063435)

The same way as X did? You mean produce a hell old protocol which was network transparent yet utterly incompatible with SHM requiring every modern distribution to have the compositor render the frame and then send it over the network as a bitmap? Wait what? I just described VNC.

Actually no I didn't. VNC uses compression, X doesn't. Hence remote X running on any system produced in the past 20 years actually holds the crown as the only system SLOWER than VNC over the network. It's only saving grace is that you can send individual apps and don't need to export the entire desktop. Then there's the underlying problem of a protocol which forces a shitload of talking to the local server before even being capable of sending a bitmap to the remote one.

As one X developer described it, it is not possible to do remote desktop any worse than X.

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064401)

Well there is a reason why the person posted as Anonymous Coward. :-)

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (1)

dkf (304284) | about 8 months ago | (#46065223)

Hence remote X running on any system produced in the past 20 years actually holds the crown as the only system SLOWER than VNC over the network.

It's only a problem if you're sending bitmaps back and forth across the network, whereas other drawing primitives are fast. The only problem is that too many half-competent developers have decided that the only way to do things was to draw on local bitmaps and then push them to the display (possibly with some extra fetching the display buffer back in the other direction a few times too, just for fun). That's just never going to be all that fast on a realistic network due to the latency involved.

The proper fix is to strengthen the remote processing model so that there is less rendering remote from the display hardware. Merely drawing some text, even if it is antialiased, shouldn't ever require bit blits over the network.

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065797)

The proper fix is to strengthen the remote processing model so that there is less rendering remote from the display hardware. Merely drawing some text, even if it is antialiased, shouldn't ever require bit blits over the network.

If you wanted to make it seem like server-side rendering is a good idea, you couldn't have picked a worse example. The unholy mess that is the current X font system (X Font Server, anyone?) is exactly WHY developers just said 'fuck it' and started rendering everything client-side.

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (3)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 8 months ago | (#46065515)

As one X developer described it, it is not possible to do remote desktop any worse than X.

Well this is the problem and why Wayland is greeted with such suspicion.

The claim is "oh it's better than X because it's being done by X developers", and then you have claims like that which are disingenuous bordering on an outright lie.

Just about everything does remote windowing worse than X. Even if you accept that X sucks, everything else sucks harder. The thing that seems to be by far the best is NX, and that's basically juiced X, not X with all the bits removed.

Re:X's way is the only feasible way. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066457)

Well this is the problem and why Wayland is greeted with such suspicion.

Yes, greeted with suspicion by trolls. Do go on...

Just about everything does remote windowing worse than X. Even if you accept that X sucks, everything else sucks harder.

Says the troll in denial. Meanwhile, a majority of developers and users who have more knowledge and experience than you disagree. Either way, Wayland is moving forward and when the day comes when Wayland outperforms X in every measurable way, I know you'll still be trolling.

Re:Shut the fuck up (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46063417)

Actually the idea itself of one to one instead of one to many done by screen scraping sucks in itself. It's an ugly and resource intensive hack.

Re:Shut the fuck up (2)

rwa2 (4391) | about 8 months ago | (#46062909)

Yeah, you guys are using the wrong version of VNC / RealVNC.

Look up tightVNC or even tigerVNC if you need something fast enough to do 3D graphics and maybe even full motion video at a few FPS.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46063191)

Yet back in the early 1990s we could use X apps on our Sun workstations from our New York office, even when they were running on systems in California and Texas. This was without any delay, on computers that make smartwatches look like supercomputers, over shitty ISDN connections.

Yeah, I hear you brother! It's just too bad that it's 2014 now and you can't think of a single valid use-case for forwarding X apps over the Internet that isn't a direct consequence of some other horrible compromise that'd ideally be fixed first, such as being stuck using legacy apps on platforms that can't be upgraded or migrated away from.

Wayland probably won't be able to perfectly replicate your perfect 1992 X experience, because nobody (who isn't the kind of fucking retard who runs shit remotely just to make themselves feel like one computer isn't enough power for them) gives a shit about doing that kind of thing any more.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46063455)

You tell it brotha! Here in 2014 we don't use any of that ancient shit like headless computers and virtual machines! I've got 82 nvidia cards plugged in, one for each guest OS!

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066575)

If you're accessing headless machines or VMs via a remote GUI, you should be banned from using computers. Learn to use a command line.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (4, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | about 8 months ago | (#46063825)

> Wayland probably won't be able to perfectly replicate your perfect 1992 X experience, because nobody (who isn't the kind of fucking retard who runs shit remotely just to make themselves feel like one computer isn't enough power for them) gives a shit about doing that kind of thing any more.

What hole have you been hiding in?

Remote desktops are all the rage now. They are very common in corporations and even "regular people" are using them.

The rest of the world has caught up to the 1992 X experience. Now clueless nitwits want to set us back 30 years because they think it's trendy or some such.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065481)

Remote desktops are a stop-gap for people using shitty apps that don't have any better kind of network functionality designed in, or people trying to uninstall browser toolbars off gramma's old pc. Nobody *wants* to use them.

Just like nobody wants to go back to shitty-looking Motif desktops because they're fucking eyesores. But no, we should bin off pointless frivolities such as anti-aliased fonts and go back to 8-bit colour, because some guys somewhere need to visualise petabytes of CFD data from outdated software, across the continent.

If those "clueless nitwit" developers had any sense, they'd volunteer their time maintaining these shitty old tools, just for those guys.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46064011)

Yeah a retard who is trying to figure out why an aircraft wing starts fluttering via a CFD simulation on TACC's Stampede or maybe trying to determine where the asbestos fibers from explosion in the densest part of a major US city are going to disperse to via a dispersion model on NCAR's Yellowstone. Yeah I'm some "kind of fucking retard who runs shit remotely just to make themselves feel like one computer isn't enough power for them", because even with 72286 cores my jobs still take hours to run and the output is tens of terabytes. Try using using a visualization tool at a remote site with vnc and then try it with ssh and X forwarding. Obviously another linsux fanboi who's claim to fame is yet another theme for gnome3 and who has no idea what a computer might be used for other than updating his facebook page.

Re:VNC "works fine"? What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065213)

If your app is graphically intensive it's going to suck over X regardless.

If it's not, it shouldn't even have to use X.

'grats on having to use shitty software I suppose. Just he said, no valid use case.

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (0)

sjames (1099) | about 8 months ago | (#46065239)

I don't want a remote desktop, I want a single app forwarded. Some of the machines I forward X from don't even have X itself or the desktop installed, just librarues and an app or 2. On the few occasions I want the whole desktop, I use VNC just fine.

As for windows, since when did it work fine?

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062149)

Yes. It's on the road map.

Not Wayland, but Weston (2)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 8 months ago | (#46063509)

Wayland as a replacement for the X protocol does not define a lot of the functionality of X but rather puts it to the client. It's up to the Wayland client implementation to define things like remote display.

Weston has two network backends in its code base which are being worked on. One is their own implementation of something similar to VNC much the same way X currently does remote rendering but with the advantage of compression, and the other is an implementation of FreeRDP.

In any case it's not's Wayland providing remote X it's the client.

Re:Not Wayland, but Weston (1)

Lemming Mark (849014) | about 8 months ago | (#46065595)

There was a SPICE backend as well, which also sounded interesting but I don't know what the status of that was.

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (1)

sjames (1099) | about 8 months ago | (#46065255)

So if we'll just shut up and jump, they pinky swear that they'll meet us half way down with a parachute?

Re:X forwarding-like feature? (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | about 8 months ago | (#46066081)

Yes.

But you don't have to jump. Whoever creates your distribution will jump in your stead.

So... what is it? (1)

nefus (952656) | about 8 months ago | (#46062335)

Hey guys, what happened to explaining what something might be on the front page description? I'll be flogged for this and called a troll but I've got no idea what this might be. And I'm sure that I'm not alone.

Re:So... what is it? (2)

kwerle (39371) | about 8 months ago | (#46062499)

Yeah, I'm mostly with you - though this has been bubbling on /. for ... a couple of years, now? Still - you're right and the editors suck.

Wayland is an alternative display system that could maybe someday replace X.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

Re:So... what is it? (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#46062667)

Arrgghh, that new URL-shortening feature of Slashdot is kind of annoying...

Re:So... what is it? (4, Informative)

coolsnowmen (695297) | about 8 months ago | (#46062539)

Some guys who worked on Xorg/X11 for years are redesigning it to be better. They got some good ideas but it will be a while before it can actually replace Xorg/X11. Here is something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

Re:So... what is it? (4, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#46062725)

Some guys who worked on Xorg/X11 for years are redesigning it to be better.

Yes.

'Xorg sucks, but this new interface it will be much better. Trust us! We wrote Xorg!'

Re:So... what is it? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46063031)

How about:

"For 20 years we've been developing the code that allowed _actual_ applications to do what they do while being shackled by this protocol dreamed up by people who , for the obvious reason, didn't have a clue where things were going. Now we think we have a _pretty good_ idea of how this should work, unlike the aforementioned, and the hordes of muppets on the internet, so we're doing it. But no one's forcing you to use it. You're more than welcome to get coding on x.org or xfree instead of whining on slashdot about how it's better."

Re:So... what is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065369)

Now we think we have a _pretty good_ idea of how this should work.

Wrong

Re:So... what is it? (2)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 8 months ago | (#46063381)

No one wrote X-org. It was a fork of XFree implementation of X11. They just removed some 500k of worthless lines of code from XFree and that became X-Org.
The intent was to try and make do, it was not to fix the underlying problem.

If you go to a chef and give him a cake made entirely of cow dung and asked them to make it taste better with the restriction that he can only use dung from an animal, how do you think the cake will turn out?

The cake is XFree86, the animal dung was added to make X-Org, and the requirement to only use dung is the X11 protocol. Yes it's definitely time for a change, and the comment from a former X11 developer now Wayland developer is that regardless of what they release it couldn't possibly be any worse than X.

Re:So... what is it? (0)

jedidiah (1196) | about 8 months ago | (#46063851)

> it couldn't possibly be any worse than X.

But it can be worse. It can do less and will have no decent device driver support.

The developer priesthood needs to venture forth from it's echo chamber once in awhile and actually observe real end users.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 8 months ago | (#46064269)

It can do less

By doing less it reduces attack surface and increases maintainability. No more wondering why Xorg won't start because it can't find some useless raster font. Everything is done in toolkits that render to buffers these days.

will have no decent device driver support.

The following quote from the Wayland FAQ is entirely true:

Where possible, Wayland reuses existing drivers and infrastructure.

Wayland uses EGL and GLES2, which means that any driver that exports those (virtually all of them, given that GLES2 is a subset of OpenGL 4) is already capable of working with Wayland - which is one reason libhybris works in allowing Wayland to use Android drivers.

The developer priesthood needs to venture forth from it's echo chamber once in awhile and actually observe real end users.

So "real end users" are doing what with X11 that can't be done otherwise?

Re:So... what is it? (1)

sjames (1099) | about 8 months ago | (#46065259)

void main() {} is pretty reliable too. No exploits, no mysteries. It does nothing every time, just like it's supposed to.

But it will never be a popular productivity tool.

NO! That's misleading (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46063465)

Keith Packard saying "keep up the good work" is NOT some guys who worked on Xorg/X11 for years redesigning it to make it better. Some fanboys like to pretend it's so but that's just misleading name dropping.

What did happen is a guy who wrote an extension to X recently decided he'd do his own project which differs from X in many ways.
It's really about putting stuff into a framebuffer instead of the more complex X framework. That pushed a lot more complexity back onto the writers of the applications but there's hope (and some evidence) that writers of toolkits such as Qt will pick up the slack.

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 8 months ago | (#46064295)

there's hope (and some evidence) that writers of toolkits such as Qt will pick up the slack.

Err, I don't know why you put it in such thin terms. Qt has pretty thoroughly integrated support for Wayland via QtWayland [qt-project.org] , which lets you write your own Wayland compositor using the QtCompositor class.

Architectures like Wayland directly benefit toolkits like Qt because it directly services what Qt was doing already: rendering in a buffer and displaying it.

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46064831)

Err, I don't know why you put it in such thin terms.

Because there is still some way to go before there is a fully functional Wayland environment.
I tried to go for maximum bland to avoid pissing off the thin skinned but it appears that even faint praise is taken as some sort of attack. Am I supposed to wave my arms and shout "X sux - go Wayland!" like the mindless fanboys?

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 8 months ago | (#46065115)

Because there is still some way to go before there is a fully functional Wayland environment.

There's already fully functional Wayland environments, it's shipping on at least one vehicle IVI system and Jolla's handset. What's missing is distro adoption, but even that's inevitable. Far from the "hope" that toolkits will take up the slack -- they already have.

it appears that even faint praise is taken as some sort of attack.

Are you so sensitive that you take simple replies as attacks?

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46065179)

You are the one with the "thin terms" when I was just stating it simply. Don't try and throw it back on me that I'm not cheering for your obsession.
Links please for that shipping system. I find it difficult to believe that there has been that much progress in a couple of months and annoying fanboys have been caught out with lies about Wayland here before, so I can't take you at your word until I know you are more than that.

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

raxx7 (205260) | about 8 months ago | (#46065967)

http://jolla.com/

It's been shipping since the December 2013, using Wayland and Qt5. No X compatibility layer on this device.

That's lazy (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46066323)

You've got to be joking - a domain instead of the actual information?

Re:That's lazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066675)

It says right on jolla.com that they use sailfish os. It says right on sailfishos.org that it uses weyland.

Re:NO! That's misleading (1)

raxx7 (205260) | about 8 months ago | (#46065949)

No, you are misleading.

If you take a look at Wayland source code, you'll see stuff like Copyright © 1988-2004 Keith Packard and Bart Massey. quite often.
https://gitorious.org/wayland/wayland/source/0b29a2fec7801d2530bd004ae68eb9242417bafd:wayland/wayland-hash.c#L2-3

As for pushing back work to the toolkit developers, the Qt developers made the software (client side) backend the default back in Qt 4.4, because it was so much faster than the XRender based one for local clients.
And for Qt5, they simply didn't bother to implement a XRender based one.

So Wayland was started in 2004? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46066343)

How low can you get.
If you are going to lie then try something a bit less obvious.

How the hell did this Wayland project turn into such a ball of hate against X where people decided that any dirty trick in advocacy goes?

Re:So Wayland was started in 2004? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066605)

The creators of Wayland have been working on X for the past 25+ years. They hate X, go see any one of their many YouTube videos that explain how X isn't actually being used anymore, even when using X, and the parts that X does do, it is horrible at doing. X is just a piece of shit, even the original developers think so. It has too much legacy baggage.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064423)

Faster than you think. This year, GNOME will already be fully on Wayland. I suspect Arch will all in on Wayland. Fedora and opensuse will probably wait an extra 6 months but then jump all in. The tizen platform is already going on wayland. No, man.. X is going to be a goner in two years.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

Uecker (1842596) | about 8 months ago | (#46064823)

X will certainly not be gone. Maybe there will be a schism in the Linux community. This might actually not be bad thing. The freedesktop crowd who break my desktop (or some applications) basically every year (I think this started in 2008 or so) can go on with their misguided attempts to redesign everything over and over again in different ways. And people who want a UNIX-like system with backwards compatibility, stability, configurability, and powerful features could have there own distribution.... This would be nice.

Re:So... what is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065485)

The only schism there will be is Ubuntu and its NIH syndrome.

Re:So... what is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065897)

Did you ever consider that the system you used to post that message is the sum of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of attempts to re-design various bits of previous systems over the years? And I'd bet my third nut that all of them were called "misguided" at least once before they were accepted and became part of the computing bedrock you're pining for.

Whatever software it is that's pissing you off, just use an old version and let history forget about you.

Re:So... what is it? (2, Insightful)

SEE (7681) | about 8 months ago | (#46062921)

Wayland's an effort to stuff a pointless layer of abstraction underneath X on Linux in order to make performance worse and debugging more difficult.

(Yes, yes, they say it's an effort to replace X. But look at how they're doing the compatibility with X - running a full X server on Wayland in order to run X apps. Then look at how much effort they've put into making Wayland portable to other varieties of *nix.)

Re:So... what is it? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46063487)

Then look at how much effort they've put into making Wayland portable to other varieties of *nix

There's some hope there. Initially by design it wouldn't work on anything other than linux but the IMHO braindead choices of depending on linux only features were changed.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 8 months ago | (#46063525)

(Yes, yes, they say it's an effort to replace X. But look at how they're doing the compatibility with X - running a full X server on Wayland in order to run X apps. Then look at how much effort they've put into making Wayland portable to other varieties of *nix.)

Yeah I know. Damn that world that won't make a wholesale switch of an entire protocol at the drop of a dime. I was like you suggesting that the entire world should switch to IPv6 overnight and just throw all the IPv4 stuff in the bin. Who needs transitioning periods, or compatibility layers. This is survival of the fittest we're talking about here.

*faceplam*

Re:So... what is it? (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064439)

You won't need X if you use QT or GTK3. The compositor, toolkit, and window manager are all merged into one. The X that is running is just for legacy. But if you're using GNOME 3.12 with GTK3 apps or even GNOME 3.10, you can use wayland transparently.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

SEE (7681) | about 8 months ago | (#46065381)

You won't need X if you use QT or GTK3

Yes, I know. Reminds me of Micrografx Mirrors and WLO.

Re:So... what is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065915)

So I have to fork Qt when I write my own window manager. Great.

Re:So... what is it? (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 8 months ago | (#46066387)

The compositor, toolkit, and window manager are all merged into one

And for some reason, just like with Motif, they think doing that is a better idea than something flexible.

Waiting for !Linux support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46062621)

Wake me up when they actually support another operating system. Until then, it's a linuxism.

Re:Waiting for !Linux support (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about 8 months ago | (#46063873)

...and here is another problem with this kind of half-baked nonsense.

Linux benefits from being just another Linux. It may not be "certified" but it is close enough to the other real Unixen that it can be treated as one of the fold.

Nonsense like this just widens the distance between Linux and other Unix.

If I wanted Apple style nonsense, I would use a Mac.

Re:Waiting for !Linux support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065493)

Other Unix might as well remain dead at this point. And that's a good thing.

Re:Waiting for !Linux support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066299)

What do the other Unixes even matter? These days Linux does everything that other Unixes do. And much, much more.

Re: Waiting for !Linux support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46065577)

There are no other non-OSX Unix(-like) operating systems. They're dead weight. Legacy. Waiting to die. It's over, Linux won a long time ago. Stop trying.

And most of all, they can and should just stick to X and not hold Linux down.

Re: Waiting for !Linux support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46066661)

Linux distros are turning into Windows. Bad design, lots of bloat. I've seen several interviews with some of the original creators of Unix from AT&T and Berkeley, they talked about how the Linux ecosystem is drifting away from what makes Unix, Unix. At least the BSDs are doing a decent job sticking close to the original design philosophies. FreeBSD even has a few of the original Berkeley devs of old.

The Linux kernel is still good and many useful tools are still "Unix-y", but they're becoming the minority and the Linux ecosystem is starting to get a strange duplication of features in many different tools. A good Unix like system should maintain the "Single responsibility" principal, not have lots of competing overlapping feature sets.

There is only one paste buffer (2)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | about 8 months ago | (#46064355)

I don't know if y'all know this, but there is only one clipboard in Wayland. You're going to have to get used to having both middle click and ctrl-v pointing to the same thing.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?