TLDR of linked gist: wayland is not X therefore it is bad. end of.
Wayland breaks Xclip: As you said it yourself, Xclip is an X11 application, so it doesn’t work on Wayland. Of course it wouldn’t work on Wayland. With Wayland, we’re trying to prevent what happened with Xorg from happening again, or am I wrong?
also, github.com/bugaevc/wl-clipboard. perhaps all OP (of gist) needs is a simple shim that can convert calls to xclip to wl-copy/paste? that doesn’t seem too hard to make compared to keeping X.org alive I’d say (perhaps they should try making it if it’s that much of a problem)
Wayland breaks screensavers: Yeah, that seems to be the case.
[…] Adding screen savers to Wayland is not simply a matter of “port the XScreenSaver daemon”, because under the Wayland model, screen blanking and locking should not be a third-party user-space app; much of the logic must be embedded into the display manager itself. This is a good thing! It is a better model than what we have under X11. […]
[…] Under X11, you run XScreenSaver, which is a user-space program that tries really hard to keep the screen locked and never crash. It is very good at this, but that it needs to try so hard in the first place is a fundamental design flaw of X11. […]
other people can comment on the parts they know about, these are two i know of off the top of my head
In the modern era, the main purpose of a screen saver is to lock the screen, and has been for most users for a long time. Many of us would also like to have pretty pictures on our locked screens.
It no longer has anything to do with preventing burn-in, so you’re right from a certain point of view.
On X11 systems, XScreenSaver is two things: it is both a large collection of screen savers; and it is also the framework for blanking and locking the screen.
Amazing text! I was just commenting how ridiculous the article is this morning and now you have written a more lenghty criticism.
As for the Zoom bit. I will add my 2 years experience of using it on Wayland on Artix as well as Void Linux - I never used Gnome and it worked fine on Sway and River on my iGPU. In between a few updates I did face a few crashes of zoom when rendering on my nvidia gpu but it was still fine. I have not used zoom in over an year so I can’t comment on how it is now.
As for “wayland does not work properly on nvidia.” Solely nvidia is blame. They have been pushing out patches to bring out more support but it’s just nvidia who can fix that in the end. While I would not want to assume what hardware the author uses. Wayland works like butter on my Intel hardware.
Great alternatives for xclip and many other X-tools are already in the market.
The VSync issue on wayland is genuine. Disabling it in-game does not affect anything because it is enforced by the compositor. VSync is an integral part of Wayland Compositioning (acc. to the wlroots dev) but a solution to automatically disable it in full screen applications, etc is down the pipeline and work is ongoing. I have not been following it but I think some fixes were already released, I could be wrong.
As for X11 Atoms: stackoverflow.com/…/x-to-wayland-what-about-atomsJust boils down to the application dev’s willingness to port the app to Wayland. The author of the ‘boycott wayland’ article seems to just want wayland to implement Xorg 1:1 for it to not fail their stupid standard of what-should-be-boycotted. And at that point Wayland is not Wayland but Xorg.
Most of the arguments presented in the ‘Boycott Wayland’ article are either generic issues being worked upon by the devs or things that don’t have much relevance but put down in a manner as if to almost fear-monger that Wayland is the spawn of the devil and must not be used at all.
As for “wayland does not work properly on nvidia.” Solely nvidia is blame.
Nobody but Wayland apologists cares who is to blame. If it doesn’t work on their hardware that clearly is an issue with the idea that Wayland should completely replace X11/xorg because out of Wayland and Nvidia if one of those two goes away it will be Wayland, not Nvidia.
You clearly do not know what you are talking about so I have no interest in giving more value to your already worthless comment. It is amusing that you must introduce the term “Wayland Apologist” as if that has any meaning in this sector.
So I guess you don’t have anything but insults then to refute that blame is at best a secondary issue and most likely a complete non-issue for people on whose systems Wayland won’t work. Unless all you care about is playing blame games but not about the actual practical issues blame is irrelevant.
I mean, you started your comment by saying “Wayland apologists” - I’m not sure why you thought it would go over just fine.
Which is unfortunate that you did, the Linux community already has quite a bit of hate for Nvidia (for good reason) but comments like these tend to just make people who use Nvidia hardware look bad. I say this as someone who made the exact same position on the argument (so to speak) in a similar thread a few days ago.
Nouveau is stable and runs, but don’t expect the best performance. The official NVIDIA driver is unstable, lacks proper wayland support but has decent performance. I’d go with anything but a NVIDIA GPU.
The same wayland bait is posted every week from new ban evading accounts which eventually also get banned.
They keep coming and getting shown the door, like Barney here.
Yea, don’t hesitate to report them.
Honestly, I literally couldn’t give a shit that anyone criticizes Wayland itself, but they’re a generally toxic user that’s easily recognizable by their constant hateboner for Wayland (among other things).
I don’t think a good response to " breaks " is to say "yes, because was designed to work with and hasn’t been updated to use ". Part of the task of replacing something old - onerous though it be - is to provide a smooth route to support old programs and functionality.
Wayland deliberately broke everything, but then was rolled out prematurely at least on some distros, before giving the vast X ecosystem enough time (which was guaranteed to be a long time, due to how large and entrenched it was) to update. Besides which, the “OUTDATED” post has an awful lot of things you acknowledge are still issues!
I would argue that promoting Wayland as production ready is still premature considering the number of excuses Wayland proponents have to make who is at fault for Wayland’s shortcomings (Nvidia seems to be a big one but people who have needs the short-sighted protocol design didn’t account for are a close second).
The problem, as I see it, is that the author of the original Gist does not really want wayland replacements for what he has, but rather what he has to also work on wayland.
Wayland didn’t break everything. It broke what relied on X11 specific stuff, which turned out to be a lot of things. The vast majority of issues still present with Wayland are edge-cases that will only see the light of day when the people with those edge-cases start using wayland. And as long as distros default to X11, that won’t happen. So that distros, like Fedora, started defaulting to Wayland “early” on (yes I put early in quotes, because it’s only perceived as early) is actually a good thing. Makes the compositor developers aware of edge-cases they can’t catch themselves.
I’vge been using Wayland exclusively for over a year and apart from a couple of small bugs, not even missing functions, I haven’t experienced any issues relating to Wayland directly. But that’s for my use case. YMMV as always.
The problem, as I see it, is that the author of the original Gist does not really want wayland replacements for what he has, but rather what he has to also work on wayland.
It's like the Windows users expecting to use all the same software on Linux when they move over problem, but in microcosm.
The main issue here is not that some of the issues that are mentioned there are not genuine. They indeed are genuine and have mostly already been notified to the devs working on the protocols and the compositors. The issue here is how those are presented. By creating this almost cultish “battle between the 2 display servers” thing is not productive and demoralizes developers. Making criticism is one thing and productive but “boycotting” is not. And certainly not in the bad faith way the author of that article has done. I myself have both X and WL setups and I alternate between them frequently. I am not sitting here “boycotting” one display server in a prejudiced manner. This is Linux, not Windows or MacOS. Users are free to continue using Xorg and develop it according to them if they do not like something else. And similarly, they are free to use Wayland.
Timeshift forces you to use a very specific layout of btrfs partitions or whatever those are called. On Fedora.for instance, unless you set them up manually, Timeshift will not work. Snapper isn’t so picky.
I never had to set it up. I use endeavour OS and all I did was choose “btrfs” in the installer. That’s it. I just installed timeshift after that and ran it like normal. No issues. Installed auto snap and grub-btrfs and I’m in the races.
I know this thread is likely to quickly descend into 50 variants of “ew, snap”, but it’s a good write up of what is really a pretty interesting novel approach to the immutable desktop world.
As the article says, it could well be the thing that actually justifies Canonical’s dogged perseverance with snaps in the first place.
I actually don’t understand the issue people have with Snaps. The main gripe seems to be “It’s controlled by Canonical”.
But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn’t that the same with every distro’s repository?
But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn’t that the same with every distro’s repository?
No. You can add any other repository to apt, rpm, Flatpak, etc. You cannot do the same with Snap and that’s by design. Canonical wants to be the sole gatekeeper of Linux software, hoping that all developers have no alternative but to publish software on the Snap store (ideally only there) which works best on Ubuntu.
Exactly. I feel they want to sell it to a big player, but no big player will touch it unless they can fully control it. Hence snap as part of that plan. Ubuntu is a hell no for me.
How would they trap everyone in the ecosystem?
This isn’t Apple, there’s a gajillon other ways of getting software you can use on every single linux distro.
Then I guess it’s a good thing they don’t control all other Linux distros.
But they would to a degree if the Snap Store would actually succeed becoming the Linux app store (like Steam is for games but that’s more because all other vendors don’t care to make a Linux client).
From reading this that’s not the whole story. Someone working at canonical successfully made a version of snap that could use alternative stores, but the default version does not allow it
And honestly at the point of installing that modified version you may as well just install a different package manager anyway
You can; the issue is that you can’t add two snap repositories at once.
This is functionally pretty much the same thing, as nobody is likely to want to use snap while locking themselves out of the main snap repository, but it’s still important to make the distinction.
In theory I guess there’s nothing stopping you setting up a mirror of the main snap repo with automatic package scraping, but nobody’s really bothered exploring it seeing as no distro other than Ubuntu has taken any interest in running snap.
It’s all open source so there’s no reason you couldn’t fork it and add that functionality. Although it’d probably be a fairly involved piece of work; it wouldn’t be a simple one-line change.
It’s not all open source. Canonical merely made available a super simple reference implementation of the Snap server but the actual Snap Store is proprietary.
I was referring to snapd, which is the thing that actually has the hard limit on a single repository. That’s fully open source (and there’s one major fork of it out in the wild, in the form of Ubuntu Touch’s click). The tooling for creating snap packages is also all open source.
The APIs which snapd uses to interact with its repo are also open source. While there’s no turnkey Snap Store code for cloning the existing website, it’s pretty trivial to slap those APIs on a bog standard file server if you just want to host a repo.
Not open-sourcing the website code is a dick move, but there’s nothing about the current set up that would act as an obstacle for anyone wanting to fork snap if that’s what they wanted to do. It’s just with flatpak existing, there’s not a lot of point in doing so right now.
I’m pretty excited about it. It’s a much cleaner solution to the problem immutable OSes are trying to solve. Dare I say it’s better even than the Android model because it covers the whole stack with a single system.
I appreciate that they try, and as much as I dislike some of snap’s design choices I think it has a place. Flatpak appears to be the winner in this race however, and I feel like this is Unity all over. Just as the project gets good they abandon it for the prevailing winds. I’ve been told the snap server isn’t open source, which is a big concern?
Unlike desktop environments where there were equivalent alternatives to Unity, Flatpak isn’t an alternative to Snap that can deliver an equivalent solution. You can’t build an OS on top of Flatpak. This is why I think that if Snap makes the lives of Canonical developers easier, they’ll keep maintaining it. We’ll know if Ubuntu Core Desktop becomes a mainstream flavor or the default one. I think there is a commercial value of it in the enterprise world where tight control of the OS and upgrade robustness are needed. In this kind of a future Snap will have a long and productive life. If it ends up being used only for desktop apps which Flatpak covers, it may fall by the wayside as you suggested.
Absolutely, and I think that’s why snap has a future at all. Immutability is the future, as well as self-contained apps. We saw the explosive growth of Docker as indication that this was the way. If they can make their tooling as easy as a Dockerfile they will win just by reducing the work needed to support it.
I don’t like Canonical pushing snaps as universal apps for all distros, because of issues like sandboxing not working on mainline kernels.
But it’s pretty interesting to see how a fully snap based desktop OS could look like. It might have less limitations than rpm-ostree. Easy access to recent mesa and similar would be awesome.
Snap makes a lot of sense for desktop apps in my opinion. There’s a conceptual difference between system level packages that you install using something like APT, and applications. Applications should be managed at the user layer while the base system should provide all the common libraries and APIs.
It’s also worth noting that this is a similar approach to what MacOS has been doing for ages with .app bundles where any shared libraries and assets are packaged together in the app folder. The approach addresses a lot of the issues you see with shared libraries such as having two different apps that want different versions of a particular library.
The trade off is that you end up using a bit more disk space and memory, but it’s so negligible that the benefits of having apps being self-contained far outweigh these downsides.
The problem here is that for that purpose, Flatpak is better in nearly every way and is far more universal
I think Snap makes the most sense for something like Ubuntu Core, where it has the unique benefit of being able to provide lower level system components (as opposed to Flatpak which is more or less just for desktop GUI apps), but it doesn’t make sense for much else over other existing solutions
What I post is relevant and on-topic and you have outed yourself as an actual paid shill. I’ll give you a tip, don’t advocate for censorship so openly. Even if you do, there are discreet ways to do so.
Censorship is about you being limited in the actions you can take to express yourself. It is not about cushioning you from the consequences of those actions from the people around you.
You obviously were allowed to take action: The contents was apparent upon on a forum and here as well. People reacted to your actions: Admins removed your contents and blocked you and I am telling you that your understanding of wayland as well as politics is limited.
You seem to use the word censor a lot. For someone who who clearly has no idea what freedom of speech means.
Let me give you a clue. Your freedom of speech in no way forces others to provide you with a platform. Just governments not to silence you. Private citizens running web sites are not governments. So have no obligation to support your ideals.
When private community moderators do not want to deal with the opinions you push. They are not removing anything from you. You are failing to sell your ideals in a way that appeals to the people you are trying to force your ideas upon.
If you want to communicate with no limits. Host your own community on your own instance. And hope you do not piss off enough people to be de federated.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.