Wayland Isn't Ready For the Fedora 24 Desktop (phoronix.com) 120
An anonymous reader writes: There was much hope that Fedora 24 would be the first major Linux distribution using Wayland by default in place of an X.Org Server, that didn't pan out with Fedora 24 Workstation developers deciding not to use Wayland by default but it will remain a log-in time option. Fedora Wayland has made a lot of progress but functionality like on-screen keyboard, accessibility, remote displays, USB display hot-plugging, and other functionality is incomplete for the Fedora 24 timeline. At least there are many other Fedora 24 features that made it for this next release due out in June. Wayland will turn eight years old this year.
Re: (Score:2)
Because X11 wasn't just a random name - there were previous versions of the X Windows System.
Re: (Score:2)
Which was a successor to the W windowing system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What unsolved problem does Wayland address?
No one has any difficulty securely running GUIs across networks.
Give them a chance to get it working on the desktop first :)
Re: (Score:1)
Also known as the Cascade of Attention Deficit Teenagers [jwz.org] development model.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Did you miss Perl 6 hitting 1.0 last year?
I've used Wayland on Fedora on my laptop. Is it perfect? No, but absolutely usable. That's a big upgrade from just a year ago.
Re:Wayland, Rust, Servo, Perl 6, Diaspora (Score:5, Insightful)
Replacing X is a big project. Sometimes it takes a while to generate something good.
I'm not sure anyone has a good model for handling rewrites of massive projects. The experiences of KDE 4.0 and Gnome 3.0 come to mind. Eventually, they were better, but it takes some time with a massive upgrade like that.
The other issue is that User's often have a very good idea of what they don't like. However, bulimic criticism does not help to refine a software product. It just splits the ecosystem. Ultimately the user's need to use their computer, and the new software just isn't ready. So the developer's and user's go in different directions.
Closed source isn't the solution either: with Windows 8, Microsoft split it's ecosystem. Windows 10 hasn't fixed the split (yet).
Re: (Score:2)
Replacing X is a big project. Sometimes it takes a while to generate something good.
I'm not sure anyone has a good model for handling rewrites of massive projects. The experiences of KDE 4.0 and Gnome 3.0 come to mind. Eventually, they were better, but it takes some time with a massive upgrade like that.
The other issue is that User's often have a very good idea of what they don't like. However, bulimic criticism does not help to refine a software product. It just splits the ecosystem. Ultimately the user's need to use their computer, and the new software just isn't ready. So the developer's and user's go in different directions.
Closed source isn't the solution either: with Windows 8, Microsoft split it's ecosystem. Windows 10 hasn't fixed the split (yet).
Perhaps we just defer Fedora24 for six months, and allow the F24 enhancements to be rolled into Fedora23. From a workspace user, there is little difference between F22 and F23. So, we could say, Fedora23 is a rolling release. And Fedora23 becomes Fedora23.1
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is a core feature of X11, but it hasn't worked since X11R5
WTF is this shit? This FUD has been cropping up on every wayland thread recently. It is outright wronf. Remote windowing still works just fine. It did not stop working in X11R5. This is easily verified.
Re:Wayland, Rust, Servo, Perl 6, Diaspora (Score:5, Informative)
+1
We run over 150 [Linux based] thin clients using X11R7, and before than, on X11R6. And being thin, that means remoting the ENTIRE DESKTOP SESSION- window manager, clients, everything. And those client apps come from various places on various servers, sometimes even the local machine.
Now, this is a *BUSINESS* environment.... we are not trying to push video games, music, or movies through X11. That won't work well. But Firefox, LibreOffice, Clawsmail, GIMP, Pluma, Inkscape, Pidgin, PDF viewers/writers, etc, and all our AP/GL/AR/Payroll/etc work just dandy.
Re: (Score:3)
People doing payroll on a LAN practically do not matter. People sharing windows in teleconferences outnumber them by several orders of magnitude, and people use Windows and Macs for that type of use case. You may not know that MS and Apple got into a brief escalation/competition around 2000 over desktop conferencing, and in the process leapfrogged X network transparency considerably.
X cannot share a window with 10 or 20 people efficiently. Linux users reach for VNC for that use case, and it is an inefficien
Re:Wayland, Rust, Servo, Perl 6, Diaspora (Score:4, Interesting)
That is why we should have been putting effort into something 100% backwards compatible with X11... X12. All kinds of things COULD have been rolled in- compression, local cursor, broadcast, etc.
How have Windows and OS X been better? (Score:2)
For example, how do you use remote windows or something like VNC on either of those right out of the box?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For example, how do you use remote windows or something like VNC on either of those right out of the box?
I can't speak to the Mac, because I choose not to waste money, but on Windows it couldn't be much easier. You can send remote assistance requests, or you can open up direct access for RDC. Either way, RDC uses RDP, which is a pretty damned good protocol by most accounts, and which is extremely tolerant of low-bandwidth connections.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, don't tell me about some $400 POS loss leader that you think is somehow equivalent to any Mac in terms of build quality.
Argue with that if you want, that's been my experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, don't tell me about some $400 POS loss leader that you think is somehow equivalent to any Mac in terms of build quality.
But that's the entire point. If you want a run-of-the-mill, commodity PC, and that's all you need, you don't get a Mac, as they only sell high-end. I've been getting by just fine for decades with cheap PCs.
Re: (Score:2)
True enough, they also sell an overpriced entry model. But I'm sure it's "build quality" makes it worth twice the price of something comparable [newegg.com].
Re: (Score:1)
A $499 Mac Mini is not what I'd call "high end."
I couldn't have said it any better.
Re: (Score:2)
What's funny is that you think this helps your argument, when earlier you were ragging on "$400 POS loss leader". For $400 you can get a much better PC than the POS Mac Mini, minus the ephemeral Apple "build quality" (also known as the Reality Distortion Field).
Re: (Score:3)
A "much better PC" that comes with malware out of the box and slows down after a year of use, and can't even play a DVD without an add-on that usually has some hideous marketing gimmick built in to bamboozle an over-50 user into opening their wallet.
Haaaahahahaha!
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't had a need to play a DVD on my PC in years, but if I did I'd install VLC (but actually I wouldn't even bother with a DVD player on a new PC purchase). You can uninstall crapware or install Linux. Or you can just buy a cheap Chromebook or Chromebox if all you want is a computer for old people with no technical skills.
Oh, and if you want to do PC gaming... I can toss in a $50, "outdated" graphics card and play most games at decent settings. Do that with your Mac Mini POS.
Can't give you the smug Mac
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
X has 'NX' as a low-bandwidth add on that competes well with RDP. But its clunky to install and administer, and the main X projects ignored it because the original 1980s X network transparency is just so utterly perfect (chatty, high-bandwidth, no ability to broadcast or share windows).
Re: How have Windows and OS X been better? (Score:2)
OS X comes with VNC. You configure it via the system settings. Windows comes with RDP. You configure it via the system settings.
Re: (Score:3)
And VNC is shit...it would be much nicer if they implemented RDP or some sort of analog for Quartz. I imagine you could compost Quartz images over RDP or even have WindowServer carry the information over a SSH channel to a local rendering client but we will never see that happen because it is closed source.
$ dnf search rdp
:3389
xrdp.x86_64 : Open source remote desktop protocol (RDP) server
$ netstat -anp | grep
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3389 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 15287/xrdp
I haven't used it much but it works.
Re: (Score:3)
This did happen. It was called NX, made X really fly over Internet connections and added features like window-sharing.
The main X projects (Xfree86 and Xorg) turned their noses up at it.
It was excellent and good enough for me to use it for years. But eventually the writing was on the wall.... If NX features (and the use cases that gave rise to them) were not mainstreamed into X and *nix development, the conferencing apps would not appear. So Windows and OS X with their circa-2000s version of network transpar
Hmm (Score:1)
Yes indeed
Re: (Score:2)
Good news "MARCH 4, 2016
https://blogs.gnome.org/mclase... [gnome.org]
ob (Score:2)
// Lame joke about Hurd & DNF goes here
Re: (Score:2)
I sometimes rally race. Nothing fancy, just an amateur, and my car (Saab 900S Turbo) has a blown engine - so, definitely nothing fancy. Anyhow, DNF means "Did Not Finish" to me.
I'm thinking with Hurd as the topic, DNF just might be applicable on a number of levels.*
(*) Sorry RMS, but it's true. Please don't appear in the middle of the night with a Samurai sword and kill me while I sleep.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But where to the remote X app come from? They are UNIX/Linux apps which onlz exist because X is the universal display protocol. X essentially unifies the ecosystem of all UNIX-like operating systems and those apps also work on Mac OS X and Windows. This is extremely nice, but in the new Wayland word-order, this ecosystem will slowly fall apart... Breaking backwards compatibility for the display protocol is really stupid IMHO.
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. I have been saying this from the start. It isn't just that Wayland can't replace what X11 does, it also will *DESTROY* our choice to use X11 just as soon as some of the major apps are ported to it and X11 becomes an afterthought.
I don't care how fancy or modern Wayland is- to me it is a mistake. That effort should have gone into making X12 instead.
Re: (Score:3)
which themselves introduce substantial security holes.
Xorg is a single huge security hole, one that had to run as root until recently.
Wayland is a step in the right direction. Perhaps in 20 years its successor will emerge and that one is perfect.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, without network transparency, a Linux GUI is quite useless to me with my many Linux machines.
Re: (Score:2)
See also mocking shaped windows and the Enlightenment window manager, despite the Enlightenment project helping them out a great deal.
Under all the hype and venom it's a framebuffer with the work of other projects such as gtk, enlightenment etc on top, a worthwhile project for some purposes going back to a more simple approach than X , but the hype and venom is really working against them.
Re: (Score:2)
Xorg network transparency is overrated. They never absorbed the advances made by the NX project, for one, meaning that X requires a LAN or similar very low latency connection to work well. The other problem is that transparency has been set in stone for a very long time, and competitors (WindowsNT and OS X specifically) leapfrogged X's net features by a mile in the early 2000s. That's why window-sharing and conferencing apps are plentiful on those platforms but very scarce on Linux -- actually, there is NO
Alternate title (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does Wayland support remote windows, vnc etc? (Score:3, Informative)
What I love about X is the flexibility one gets, which is unparalleled by any other system: I can easily start a window of an application running on another host on my machine, works fine if I am logged into that other machine using ssh. I can tunnel a whole session through sse usinv VNC and use the remote desktop directly on my local one. It supports mutliple monitors spanning one desktop or several desktop on several monitors.
Does Wayland support these things too?
Re: (Score:2)
Does Wayland support these things too?
Not yet, although various people have demonstrated proofs of concept. Since Wayland doesn't actually work reliably or properly yet, that is not a major issue. "Nobody" (probably one or two distributions will go bugshit, but not RHEL, and if you run Fedora then you chose to be an Alpha tester and you get what you signed up for) is going to be forced to switch to it for quite some time after it's made generally available by distributions.
Re:Does Wayland support remote windows, vnc etc? (Score:4, Interesting)
From what I've understood, VNC yes since it's essentially diff'd screen dumps with "damage areas" that are redrawn. In fact there's been some attempts at making a RDP-style remote capability that is slightly smarter because it knows the composition but not the contents of the window, like if you move a window the protocol knows it can just move rather than resend the contents. What you won't get is native X acceleration, meaning you can't actually send draw commands. Think like HTML, draw this box here with that text in this color.
That is also why Wayland at least in the reference implementation doesn't have server side decorations, it doesn't want to understand fonts, antialiasing, buttons, animation, themes and all that. It is only a pixel-pusher, it composites images other software has made. By itself it won't draw a window border, a minimize/maximize/close button, nothing. It made the project much easier without dependency on any graphics toolkit, but I think it might have been a mistake to present it like this is the norm and clients should/might have to write their own decorations.
I don't think applications should be forced to write their own decorations, it should be the norm that they can request decorations from the window system and that they'll take what they can get. The reference implementation should have been a wayland plug-in and might have been state of the art of the 1980s, a few fixed bitmaps and just "we expect actual environments like KDE, Gnome, even XFCE to come up with something more advanced this is basically a minimal placeholder". If you want to draw your own decorations that's something else.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been a pretty avid fan and user of VNC, in one form or another, for a very long time. Is there any reason for me to care about this? Almost nothing I try wants to forward the GUI over SSH anyhow. What benefit does Wayland, eventually, offer? Is there any compelling reason to change?
Re: (Score:3)
Since the video drivers are mostly cut and pasted from X and there isn't much slowing down in the bits they have left out that has not happened yet.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks they have is that they slow applications they want to display quickly are slow in portions that have nothing to do with displaying to the screen. Saving a few milliseconds in the new gedit starting up (Daniel Stone's strawman to show X is slow) is hard to notice when it still
Re: (Score:2)
Much thanks! I knew someone would chime in. Well, I hoped they would. I'm probably going to end up just doing what I have been doing. I'm not really seeing any compelling reason to change my behavior. So long as it doesn't break anything then I probably won't even care if the distros start using it by default.
An example is that, right now, I've been on the road since September of 2015. Well, not on the road so much but no longer home. I left on wanderlust and have managed to acquire a girlfriend, quite by a
Re: (Score:2)
For me however I use X to put output from a couple of dozen different machines on my screen and to display that needs more resources than you can get in a desktop box. VNC doesn't do the first without being very clunky (full desktops instead of just applications) and while it works with the latter a desktop on a desktop seems to annoy and confuse people a lot more than X. Wayland with or without vnc has a long way to go with the latter and they just laugh at people who want the form
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I like the TurboVNC viewer. I just keep it as a full-screen and key-combo out of it. It works well BUT (and that's a big but) I'm acclimated to it and *very* familiar with it. I like it because I can use a slower machine and just pipe things like compiling off to something else. I like it because I can split resources up. I can absolutely understand* that not many will be able to "work" like I do. I just drop it to the task-bar while not in use, I might even throw them up on separate virtual desktops,
Re: (Score:2)
X (the protocol) isn't really going away. You can run a cut down X server that does all of the decorations and so forth, then draws the window via Wayland. It isn't perfect, it may not appear exactly the same as it used to. In this way X joins VNC & RDP as client applications that can draw windows or desktops on a Wayland compositor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the lack of upgrades when a release gets too old. Especially for stuff similar to the glibc problem.
hmm (Score:1, Funny)
Ah, Wayland. The Hurd of windowing systems. I'm sure it will be amazing once finished.
Ran Wayland on F23 for ten weeks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Last metadata expiration check performed 13:01:57 ago on Sat Mar 5 09:55:42 2016.
Available Packages {snipped for brevity}
enlightenment.x86_64 0.20.3-1.fc23 updates
enlightenment-data.noarch 0.20.3-1.fc23 updates
Will it do anything rude like load a screen locker that runs even when Gnome is started. xfce did this to me and the UI was so primitive I thoug
Re: (Score:2)
X versus VNC etc (Score:1)
Seeing a lot of comparisons between X and other remote-access protocols such as VNC. From a personal use perspective I've found:
One nice thing about X is that the active window is independent of a particular desktop, or parent etc. When I use VNC, one frustration is that everything is bound inside the parent window (which is generally also restricted to a particular monitor). Larger desktops tend to suck, performance-wise, as you end up with a lot of pricey redraws.
One *nice* thing about VNC is that you can
Re:Back to XFree86 (Score:4, Insightful)
> From the XFree86 web page:
>> XFree86 Release 4.8.0 is out NOW
>> 4.8.0 release was released on 15 December 2008. Our next full release will
>> be 4.9.0, and is expected to be released in the summer/winter of 2009
[...deletia...]
> How's that working out for you?
In case you missed it, there was an internal revolt inside the XFree86 group, and XFree86 code was forked as Xorg, which is the current implementation. The last person to leave the XFree86 project forgot to turn off the lights.
XFree86 is passed on! This project is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now history! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, It's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PROJECT!!
See the current Xorg location http://www.x.org/wiki/ [x.org] It actually has stuff from late last month, rather than late last decade.
Re: (Score:2)