I just switched to Wayland and holy shit why is X11 even allowed to be the industry standard holy fuck it's so bad

just use -CY

wont switch before it has openbox support

Imagine if Windows 2.1 had been the only OS for 30 years and Windows XP was just released yesterday.

many issues, for example, the mouse is attached to your session, so a freeze on the host (gnome shell) it hangs the cursor as well

And then you realize wayland is also terrible. X11 at least has the excuse of being from an older age.

This is my dilemma. Openbox is never going to be ported, it would require a complete rewrite. I'm just hoping there will be something similar soon. Also we need a nice taskbar.

How long was Xp the only Windows option?
You know, when Longhorn failed to appear.

>using openbox
>when i3 gaps exists

Attached: suce caboose.png (230x230, 75K)

what do you mean? I turn on my computer back home and I ssh -X from a weaker device to run shit

that's the thing I hate most about wayland, it forces things to be DEs, you have to write a compositor, a window manager, a bar, etc.

you can't have separate shit

At least that has a replacement on Wayland (it's called Sway)
swaywm.org/

i hate tiling window managers and like to control it with a mouse sometimes when im too lazy to use the keyboard.

>shit why is X11 even allowed to be the industry standard
For the same reason why Windows is de facto the industry standard for workstation/desktop use.
Everyone supports it.

Wait, are you saying that the entire development process of linux software isn't dictated by a bunch of autistic neckbeard antisocial faggots that make up probably Delid dis
>What did he mean by this?

I'd be playing diablo II with my friends still, good times. :(

Attached: 1525563664020.gif (556x720, 335K)

X is enterprise grade software

Attached: 1335591126.or.23359.gif (1024x800, 20K)

you can move/resize windows with the mouse on i3

>not dwm

After figuring out that I can trivially disable tearing with a simple configuration on X, I don't really care too much about Wayland.

I know very little about x and wayland
what are some pros and cons for each if you lads would be so kind

that one has a really complex config file. took a while to learn the correct format for the things that are needed to add a keybinding to start a program. the openbox config files are so simple that even a brainlet can modify them.

Checked.

Xorg pros: After 30 years it just werks.
Xorg cons: It's X and not wayland

Wayland pros: It's not X
Wayland cons: Its vaporware, no drivers

I never understood the reason behind those checkered/dotted black-white backgrounds.
They're trippy and painful to watch, am I the only one?

I'm sure there was a reason for them at some point. Probably the graphics mode being like 4bit greyscale.

just use Accelerated-X xd

I will never use Wayland, it’s CIA nigger technology.

Attached: 1C75D28D-A007-415E-867B-594ECA84BED5.jpg (2255x900, 610K)

>Have always thought about making my own OS
>The only other person to have done it was literally fucking insane

Welp.

Attached: Memelet.gif (500x281, 1.38M)

i know two people personally who have written a very simple OS. one's a real talent but she's legitimately schizo. the other's in his late 30s and admittedly crazy (diagnosed ocd, diagnosed anxious, paranoid). the third is terry. i want to write one someday and the subject really interests me but i do think you have to be a certain amount of crazy to do it.

>>The only other person to have done it was literally fucking insane
There are hundreds of functional hobby operating systems online, see: wiki.osdev.org/Projects

Why replace something that works well? I never had any problems with X in the last couple of years. Fuck off.

‘94 peak aesthetic

They really fuck with LCDs and make them really weird to look at.

>Its vaporware
It already exists, and there are already several functional wayland compositors that you can use right now.
>no drivers
All of the free drivers work extremely well on wayland. It's just Nvidia being fuckwits and not using a proprietary interface for buffer allocations.
They really can go fuck themselves.

1994 he looked like normally functioning human

>i cant use thing
>thing must be bad because I cant use thing

Fuck off dude.

>gaps

Attached: 1516197190308.jpg (510x370, 54K)

Funnily enough I just installed Arch on my 1050ti desktop and X won't even fucking start while Wayland just werks.

Nouveau or the proprietary trash?

Does Nouveau even support 10x series cards?

I don't know. That why I'm asking, really.
I refuse to buy Nvidia shit, and exclusively recommend AMD or Intel iGPUs to people.

They're just there so you can see clearly that the graphics system works on startup, compared to just a black screen.
That's also why Xorg has moved that to the -retro startup option, as it looks plain awful except on a CRT screen.

Are AMD drivers open source? That may explain why it was so much easier to install Linux on my 10 year old radeon laptop.

>Are AMD drivers open source?
Yes, AMD has massive stepped up their game in the last couple of years. It's basically on par with Intel at this point, which has always been extremely good.
They changed their strategy where they have an open source kernel module that both an open source or proprietary userspace can use. None of this recompiling your kernel shit when you install a new driver.
The open source userspace is great, and the only reason you'd need to use the proprietary driver is for some "enterprise" GPU compute shit.

>some "enterprise" GPU compute shit
like what?

OpenCL. anything involving their firepro cards, etc.
You don't use that shit for gaming.

With the top right layout the staggered dots make it gray.

Attached: Pixel_geometry_01_Pengo[1].jpg (1100x1100, 195K)

At this point wayland and x feels the same to me. On gnome at least.

>Literally everything has to be part of compositor now if you want basic features
>It's better that way, because muh security!
Yeah, I'll continue using X11, where I can have a working keyboard daemon.

Most of the software you use requires X11. X11 needs to be replaced with something better, but Wayland isn't necessarily the software that is going to replace it in the future (Wayland isn't ready atm) Also, see Stop being such a nigger. i3 and i3gaps are entierly different from the *box family of WMs.

X11 existed long before Linux. Xorg is just a free implementation of the X11 protocol.

>what are some pros and cons
X:
+ Works
+ Modular
+ Literally every gui program is made for it
- prone to tearing
- it's old
Wayland:
+ Less prone to tearing
+ It's new
- has ~5 native apps
- some will never be ported
- shit drivers for non-native apps (meaning terrible performance for Intel graphics, for example)
- forces every FM to literally become a DE, because otherwise you wouldn't even be to change keyboard layout

its going to be really hard to make wayland popular without any x program compatibility. that kind of breaking changes have only worked for apple.

>+ Less prone to tearing
In a decently written Wayland compositor, tearing should be impossible, at least on the compositor side. In Wayland, "every frame is perfect". An application/compositor is still free to do single-buffering and tear up a storm, but that's atypical.
>- has ~5 native apps
Every GTK3 and Qt5 application is Wayland native. Things like SDL2 and GLFW also have Wayland backends.
>- some will never be ported
Which is why Xwayland exists.
>- shit drivers for non-native apps (meaning terrible performance for Intel graphics, for example)
Xwayland adds _some_ overhead, but generally everything runs perfectly fine.

I've actually worked on a Wayland compositor, so I know a fair bit about some of the things related to it.

>but Wayland isn't necessarily the software that is going to replace it
There is nothing else which has the momentum Wayland currently has; and Mir is literally dead. It was an incredibly ambitious goal, and it was obvious that trying to replace something so core to the Linux desktop was going to take a while.
I am currently using a Wayland compositor as my primary environment.

That's what Xwayland is.

It has compatibility, but a really gimped one. For example, it falls back to "modesetting" driver for Intel, which has no "TearFree" option and produces green video for me.

>In a decently written Wayland compositor, tearing should be impossible, at least on the compositor side. In Wayland, "every frame is perfect". An application/compositor is still free to do single-buffering and tear up a storm, but that's atypical.
So, just what I said.
>Every GTK3 and Qt5 application is Wayland native. Things like SDL2 and GLFW also have Wayland backends.
So, ~50 apps? Still nothing really useful for me. Good if you use GNOME or KDE.
>Which is why Xwayland exists.
Which means all the problems of X11 + some new ones, like the drivers.
>Xwayland adds _some_ overhead, but generally everything runs perfectly fine.
Read this post. Modesetting is shit and that's the default for xwayland apps.

>I've actually worked on a Wayland compositor, so I know a fair bit about some of the things related to it.
Good for you, I suppose.
Doesn't change the core deficiencies of Wayland, such as having every WM to be a DE and inability to plug external components.

>Still nothing really useful for me
Most programs are built with either of those two toolkits, excluding some older shit. I don't use Gnome nor KDE.
>Which means all the problems of X11 + some new ones, like the drivers.
Xwayland has nothing to do with drivers. Also, Wayland does not have a "driver problem". Compositors typically work with the exact same infrastructure that X11 uses.
It's Nvidia that has a fucking driver problem.
Also, Xwayland still provides _some_ of the isolation that native Wayland provides, but not between different X11 programs.
>Modesetting is shit
Modesetting has absolutely nothing to do with this.
>Doesn't change the core deficiencies of Wayland, such as having every WM to be a DE and inability to plug external components.
Wayland is defined as a somewhat minimal base spec, and the extra functionality is defined as extensions to that spec. Those extensions might try to be shared between compositors and try make it into the de-facto extensions repository (github.com/wayland-project/wayland-protocols) and some of them may be compositor specific. So saying "wayland doesn't support something" doesn't really mean much. The core spec may not support it, but extensions exist to add these extra features which people want.
Trying to shunt a bunch of this shit to other clients usually violates the security model of wayland and then will completely ruin the point.

>Most programs are built with either of those two toolkits,
Let's see what I actually use:
GIMP - GTK2
Chromium - gtk2
Inkscape- gtk2
Zathura- gtk2(I think)
Rstudio- qt5 (wow, 1 app is actually compatible)
St - don't know, not Wayland native
Almost everything else is run in St. Yeah, not working for me.

>Drivers
>Modesetting
I'm starting to doubt your knowledge. Xwayland uses modesetting driver instead of native "xf86-video-intel" for X11 apps support. Though I can't find the link right now.

>So saying "wayland doesn't support something" doesn't really mean much
Nice deflection tactic, except it means exactly what it says.
For example, you can't have external screenshooter, keyboard daemon and many other things with Wayland. You must implement them as part of "compositor".
If that's not the case, I'd be glad to hear that.

>violates the security model of wayland and then will completely ruin the point.
And that's the main problem i see with Wayland. You sacrifice a lot of things for dubious security.

So, where is your source? A random screenshot of x-window manager?

Also, Mypaint- gtk2. (And no, Brita is not an alternative, since it doesn't has infinite canvas).

>St - don't know
Raw xlib
>Xwayland uses modesetting driver instead of native "xf86-video-intel" for X11 apps support
Oh right, that fucking thing. I completely forgot those xf86-video-*s even existed, since everything I do now is just handed straight through mesa.
Modesetting is the process of setting the resolution/refresh rate (the 'mode') on a monitor and is handled by the DRM system, so I was wondering what the fuck you were talking about.
>For example, you can't have external screenshooter, keyboard daemon and many other things with Wayland. You must implement them as part of "compositor".
There is no technical reason this couldn't happen, but everybody agrees that it's not a good idea.
>You sacrifice a lot of things for dubious security
I don't even care particularly much about security, but I definitely see other people's point about it.
Wayland is just significantly better because it handles displaying shit so much better. Every frame is atomic, so there isn't going to be any bullshit tearing or anything related.
In X11, it's ridiculously hard to even find out when/if your frame is even drawn.

>Oh right, that fucking thing.
Fucking or not, it means abysmal performance for non-native programs on Intel igpu.

>There is no technical reason this couldn't happen, but everybody agrees that it's not a good idea.
How about "muh security" and "we can't allow apps to look into each other"? That's THE reason why you can't to basic things that X11 can. All it means for the end user is more inconvenience unless he/she is 100% satisfied with the way it's done in the DE of choice.
>I don't even care particularly much about security, but I definitely see other people's point about it.
>Wayland is just significantly better because it handles displaying shit so much better. Every frame is atomic, so there isn't going to be any bullshit tearing or anything related.
Maybe, that's why it supposedly has no tearing problem. But that's pretty work for the compositing manager and not the reimplementation of display server that is not actually a display server.
In the end, you sacrifice a lot for pretty much nothing.
Tearing is solved either by a checkbox in drivers, a line in X11 config or external compositor.

>In X11, it's ridiculously hard to even find out when/if your frame is even drawn.
That's a valid complaint. How about reworking that in X12 instead of breaking and gimping almost everything?

>How about reworking that in X12 instead of breaking and gimping almost everything?
These are problems inherent with the X11 spec; these aren't things you can just "fix" without breaking that. Also, there is 30+ years of technical baggage and bad design decisions.
The rest of the linux display stack evolved to the point that there was a viable opportunity to get rid of all of that, and actually have a modern display system which isn't a pile of shit.
I'd argue that having something which is "sort of like X" would be worse than starting from scratch. You don't get real backwards compatibility, yet you don't actually get to start from a clean design and do things in the way that makes sense.

About all of these "missing features" you're talking about, it's not like Wayland compositor developers are blind to this shit. People are constantly working on adding support for these things and having a healthy ecosystem where solutions will work across different compositors. The core spec may be finished, but things are still moving forward as fast as ever.
Things may not work in exactly the same way as they did in X, but that's the nature of the fundamental design differences between Wayland and X.

>In the end, you sacrifice a lot for pretty much nothing.
I'm rather knowledgeable about some of the deeper workings of the graphics stack, and Wayland allows for a lot more efficiency than X11 in more regards than just that. Now that the compositor is responsible for a lot more, it's capable of making a lot more optimisations.

I can't see why you'd *enjoy* that considering how awful performance is when tunneling X over SSH, but it's nice that it's possible at all.

Sway sucks. I had nothing but problems with it.
I don't remember what those were again, but it was bad.

Actually it's because early graphics cards were 1 bit only, black or white
As someone already mentioned, with CRT blur your get a grey looking background that you otherwise could not have on those ancient machines

>Long post about "bad" X11 with nothing concrete.
Just like any other thread on the matter.

>it's not like Wayland compositor developers are blind to this shit
It's just that they don't care (because "muh security" and "at least it's not X11 which is old and shit). Same way GNOME doesn't care for felepicker. I'd be in no way surprised if those fuckers have something to do with Wayland.

Sway has gone under basically a complete redesign for 1.0, replacing the internal library it used to handle compositor shit (wlc) with one they wrote on their own (wlroots).
While the design is not 100% complete yet, as is only available as a preview, it's _significantly_ better than it was before.

Literally the same shit
Switching to do would take ages since all the software would need to be ported

Wayland is freedesktop.org shit, which is red had sponsored shit and also the home of poetteringware
Gnome is also mostly sponsored by red hat
Any more questions?

>Any more questions?
Only sadness.

Attached: kuybei.png (500x500, 77K)

>Long post about "bad" X11 with nothing concrete.
>Just like any other thread on the matter.
-The X spec carries a lot of legacy shit like its legacy drawing and font commands, that literally nobody uses anymore, but they can't remove.
-There are parts of the X spec that basically nobody understands due to how complicated it is. It's actually possible to understand the Wayland protocol.
-The X protocol is extremely chatty, with things like opening an application potentially taking dozens of blocking round trips, and causing massive latency when starting programs.
-The "default" X11 library (Xlib) is fucking awful, and blocks on everything by default. xcb is better, but has the problem of having fucking awful documentation.
-The X protocol is extremely hard to debug. With wayland, I can just start a client with WAYLAND_DEBUG=1, and I can see the messages going back and forth, with object IDs and everything.
-Everything is single buffered by default.
-As mentioned before, it's extremely difficult or even impossible for a client to even know if/when its content is presented. You can't even notify X that you're done drawing your frame.
-Clients are able to snoop on all of the window contents and inputs of other clients, making implementing things like keyloggers trivial.

>It's just that they don't care
So you didn't read my post then. People ARE working on this shit; a lot of it's just not done yet.

there are thousands of hobby OSes

i myself have made one

tell me, how will programs like sxhkd, scrot, xgamma-equivalent etc. work under wayland protocol?

will every single WM have to make its own custom protocol for this? so we will have programs like scrot working in one WM but not in another?

if thats the case, im staying on X

Wayland worked fine for me, not a program one that refused to work because of it

The only issue I did have was getting the nvidia driver to replace the noveu(sp) one, but it works now

>-The X spec carries a lot of legacy shit like its legacy drawing and font commands, that literally nobody uses anymore, but they can't remove.
If it's not used, what's the problem?
>-There are parts of the X spec that basically nobody understands due to how complicated it is.
So, it works perfectly even without the need to understand it completely? Sounds like a good thing to me.
>-The X protocol is extremely chatty, with things like opening an application potentially taking dozens of blocking round trips, and causing massive latency when starting programs.
>Potentially
So, there "could" be a problem in some corner cases?
>-The "default" X11 library (Xlib) is fucking awful, and blocks on everything by default. xcb is better, but has the problem of having fucking awful documentation.
Yet 'St' is the best terminal emulator there is. Also, even WM writers can utilize the xcb and get results without the need to rewrite the wlc, screenshooter, keyboard daemon, xsettings and so on.
>-The X protocol is extremely hard to debug. With wayland, I can just start a client with WAYLAND_DEBUG=1, and I can see the messages going back and forth, with object IDs and everything.
Even less relevant to the user.
>-Everything is single buffered by default.
Which is not actually a default in real life.
>-you can't even notify X that you're done drawing your frame.
Use compositor.
>-Clients are able to snoop on all of the window contents and inputs of other clients, making implementing things like keyloggers trivial.
You mean like the one POC for wayland?

Once again, nothing you mentioned is bad for the end user, while Wayland has tangible deficiencies. And most your points are literally "it's old"

>People ARE working on this shit; a lot of it's just not done yet.
And when will it be done? Also nice shifting from "no reason it can't be done but everyone agrees it's a bad idea" to "people are definitely working on it, but it's hard"

And just to mention it again, Wayland is 10 years old already and still lacks basic features, forcing WM devs to reimplement half the existing apps.

>sxhkd
I know of someone who is working on this very issue. We suggesting some sort of wrapper library over xkbcommon, so such a thing wouldn't need to touch the wayland protocol at all.
>scrot
Our current solution is the oribital_screenshooter protocol, but this is something we're intending on replacing, and would be proposed to wayland-protocols.
We've recently gotten our zero-copy video capture working, and we need to provide a better fallback when the "fast" path is not available.
>xgamma
There is a gamma control protocol, which a patched version of redshift uses.

>will every single WM have to make its own custom protocol for this?
People are trying for interoperability. Just because it's not in wayland-protocols now, it doesn't mean that people aren't trying. The review process is generally very long and slow.

>legacy shit like its legacy drawing and font commands, that literally nobody uses anymore
You mean GNOME doesn't use any more
>There are parts of the X spec that basically nobody understands due to how complicated it is. It's actually possible to understand the Wayland protocol.
Maybe than those people shouldn't be developing X?
>Clients are able to snoop on all of the window contents and inputs of other clients, making implementing things like keyloggers trivial.
It also make things like screenshots and applications being aware of other windows possible without garbage like dbus

Wayland is half assed shit á la libinput, *kit and systemd

So basically, you're not developers and you don't know shit about good software design.
Most of the benefits aren't tangible for users, but for a developer, this shit is WAY better.
The real tangible benefits for users is the better graphical output, which I alone consider enough.

>It also make things like screenshots and applications being aware of other windows possible without garbage like dbus
Wayland has absolutely nothing to do with dbus and does not use it for anything.

Attached: file.png (599x750, 255K)

>Most of the benefits aren't tangible for users
Yet all the downsides are.
Great desktop software you got there.

>It also make things like screenshots and applications being aware of other windows possible without garbage like dbus
Ha, and I thought why does shit like sway requires it.

>Ha, and I thought why does shit like sway requires it.
The only two places sway uses dbus is (optionally) interacting with logind, and interacting with tray-icons.

>but for a developer, this shit is WAY better.
Which is why everyone who wants a WM has to rewrite half the X11 as part of a compositor.

I'll give it another shot, then.
Thanks.

you have to enable the compression option too to make it usable. even a 100m connection is too slow for the uncompressed mode.

>-Clients are able to snoop on all of the window contents and inputs of other clients, making implementing things like keyloggers trivial.
isnt that how it works in every os? limiting those will create some really annoying problems

>X11 : created in 1984
What the fuck have linux devs been doing for 34 years

working on issues that were more pressing than a desktop lol

Likely more than you whatever it was

Sway is great now. I've been using it since before wlroots was being written and the wlroots port has made it much, much better. Really the only thing I'm missing is popup windows working correctly.