LXQt 2.0 Released: Lightweight Desktop is Almost Wayland Compatible - Slashdot

LXQt 2.0 Released: Lightweight Desktop is Almost Wayland Compatible

›

• Re:

  X sucks for a modern desktop paradigm because it was created by nerds for nerds. Treating a network connection like a functional IPC mechanism sounds cool, but it just ended up being bandaids on bandaids, trying to make it more than a vga framebuffer. If a user didn't demand a 4k, composited, hardware accelerated, it would be functionally fine.
  
  Wayland was a solution, but as evidence of your complaining, it wasn't quite the replacement that people hoped for.
  
  However, that is the wonderful thin

  • Re:

    I do not "demand" 4k. In fact I do not want it as I see zero legitimate uses that actually require it except some really niche things. Hence I am entirely fine with X11.

  • Re:

    X isn't really the problem that people think it is. Wayland doesn't give better performance than X because modern applications are connected to X in much the same way that they are connected to Wayland. Everything is composited and the scary (old, ugly, baroque, whatever) parts of X are only used by legacy applications, but they are there when you need them. Maybe updating, maintaining, and securing those old pieces of X is unrealistic, I could kind of see that. But I have a really hard time believing that

    • Re:

      That was AIGLX. And AIGLX was a compromise between those who were hardcore X11 protocol and those wanting to extend it so much that it would cause breakage, Xgl.

      We tried gassing up the X11 protocol to get it to support more direction EGL interactions with newer video cards, nobody wanted it. So since AIGLX was about the best compromise that everyone could agree with, Wayland was started. It was one of those things that people at the time back in 2004/2006 who were saying, well if you want to completely b

• The reason X11 development has "stalled" is that it basically is finished and works pretty well. Do not fix what is not broken. Yes, I am aware that there are now a lot of morons in the Linux space that do not get that and instead mistake "new" for better. The systemd-assholes come to mind. Or the idiots that patch everything and the kitchen sink into sshd. Or the weyland people.

  • Re:

    Well, they got stuck with a few things that were awkward.
    -Can't really "lock" the screen if a context menu is open. Due to limitations in how keyboard/pointer grab work and that being the only mechanism for screen locking to work
    -Scaling is a bit limited, technically you don't have fractional scaling or per-monitor scaling in Xorg.
    -X11 implementations struggle with strategies to avoid tearing.
    -X11 model allows easy surreptitious screen scraping and keylogging.
    -The X11 model for compositing basically made wi

    • X11 implementations struggle with strategies to avoid tearing

      That was hard back when GPU memory was severely limited. Now you can use triple buffering.

      -X11 model allows easy surreptitious screen scraping and keylogging.

      Yeah, too bad the Wayland devs didn't actually set X up to use the security stuff that's built into it instead of creating a system where you need an external component to pass keypresses between applications when you want to.

      -The X11 model for compositing basically made window managers responsible for rendering *anyway*, so the X11 server imposes some formality and still makes the compositor do the real work.

      Right, that's why Wayland performance and X11 performance are basically equal. They both use a compositor model today.

  • Re:

    I run two X servers, one for each video card with one attached to my computer monitor and the other to the TV in the living room. Mostly easy peasy with a simple/etc/X11/xorg.conf file that defines which video card/keyboard combo is which. No need for systemd. No need for elogind. No need for polkit. Been running this setup for almost 20 years.
    
    I'd add pulseaudio to that list of "mistake new for better." Setting up two separate instances of pulse on top of alsa was the only real pain point because pulse

    • Re:

      People that confuse "newer" with "better".

• Re:

  It seems as if Linux has gone backwards in the last 15 odd years. In the spirit of making things easier, layers & layers of abstraction have been added, which has made everything more complex. Gone are the days when one could edit a few text files and get shit done.
  
  Now you have to use a tool to do the exact same thing. Which also then keeps changing it's syntax and way of working. If something goes wrong, then it is another pain as the tool may or may not support the edgecase you are stuck on.
  
  FreeBS

  • Re:

    if linux doesn't want to make things easier and keep it lean and technical, that's fair but then linux users can't also complain about how everybody is still using windows and apple machines

    it feels like things have gone backwards because linux desktops are trying to appeal to non-techies but are so full up their ass with tech people building it they are unable to stop navel gazing long enough to actually make a workable, casual desktop.

    thus we get articles like this which to a casual user will give them a

• Re:

  That's not a Wayland thing. That's a DE thing in Wayland. This used to be the role of X, but it is not for Wayland. Different DEs may wish to implement different methods for handling this, Wayland steps out of the way allowing DEs to implement their own process of placement.

  It is out of scope. It's up to DEs to implement it. Users should take it up with DEs. This was the thing that hobbled X, it became a kitchen sink of where to stuff things, so when people wanted performance, too many things got in t

  • Re:

    That's not a Wayland thing.

    Aaah there we go! The old "it's out of scope" argument.

    Followed by:

    They do NOT owe you support of your favorite piece

    complaining at the user for wanting stuff to work.

    You actually did both, I'm kinda impressed. Anyhow you are posting on a "year of the Wayland desktop" thread. And I'm thinking of a particular piece of software (ImageJ) which is currently maintained, very popular in many scientific circles and works perfectly on Windows, OSX and oh... what was the other system agai

    • Re:

      Then you want Windows. Here in the open source we work for our things or buy support contracts. If you wanted to just be a user, you want Windows or Mac. You should go there instead. Just like if you wanted someone to stop your house from burning down, don't go to the post office. If you want to be a spectator, go buy Windows.

      Yes. Linux is a collaborative effort, why are you suggesting they get a pass on the collaborative part? Are you suggesting that some folks should get a free ride?

      I won't. That'

      • Re:

        I'll yet again remind you you're on a "year of the Wayland desktop" thread, which it seems you don't want.

        Then you want Windows.

        lol OK. The last version of Windows I booted on a machine of my own was Windows 95.

        Linux is a collaborative effort, why are you suggesting they get a pass on the collaborative part?

        They've been providing an amazing, industry leading F/OSS tool for 27 years, with a number of spinoffs, various compatibility things implemented in other libraries. That's pretty good collaboration. They

        • Re:

          I've already covered it, you are the one that then replied with the diatribe about ImageJ.

          So I covered my point.

          I'm on the thread that indicated that window placement should be a server side thing and I indicated in Wayland it is not, it's a client side.

          Again, I'm just telling you that in Wayland window placement is client side. In X it's server side. People are allowed to have a difference in opinion on the implementation of a feature. Hence the whole reason I asked you.

          You seem to want less choice. An

          • Re:

            I've already covered it

            No you did not. You wade into a thread where I'm saying why it won't be the year of the wayland desktop saying (a) you don't care and (b) berating me for saying why it won't be.

            I get it it. Everything is everyone else's fault. Wayland is perfect. It will or won't be the year of the wayland desktop, you both don't care and care so much you need to keep shouting. Actually working is out of scope, as is acknowledging why Wayland isn't as popular as you like. Being out of scope, the only

            • Re:

              For point (b). I'm berating you because your attributing all this false sense of doom in something that isn't any kind of doom. You literally can start coding for the Xorg project today. Nothing stops you. If you do or don't see your point (a) which is pretty accurate.

              It's not fault. There's nothing to fault. It's a matter of choice. X11 has the window placement server side, Wayland has it client side. That's just a matter of choice in design. It's nobody's fault for who picks Coke and who picks Pe

              • Re:

                What on earth are you taking about? What sense of doom?

                And Wayland doesn't have it at all. There is still no protocol, and goodness theres been a bunch of bikeshedding over it...

                All I did was point out (with an example) that a feature present on all other systems that's relied on had gone MIA on Wayland desktops, and all the Wayland supporters do is yell about it. And your response was... to yell about it.

                • Re:

                  Did you?

                  Because it's just a POV between yelling and pointing out. You're like I gave an example, and I indicated that it's out of scope. Then you're like "of course it's out of scope" and went on about HOW DARE THEY MARK THAT OUT OF SCOPE!! But that's their choice to do. They get to mark it out of scope. That's how choice works. You can choose to stay with X, you can choose to fix the issues you brought up. But instead of doing any of that, you're just yelling about some MIA feature that you expect t

      • Re: Year of the Wayland desktop...

        So people who just want stuff to work shouldn't use open source?? Jesus, just listen to yourself ffs. People like you are part of the reason a lot of people and corps swerve OSS like the plague and meantime you then probably make sneering remarks about Windows lusers etc etc.

        • Re:

          It's a collaborative effort. That is open source. We are all here to work together. If you just want "stuff to work" and don't want to put any effort or money into that. Then yeah, go fuck yourself.

          As demonstrated by Linux being the number one server on the Internet. No people understand their role in this. Additionally, Linux is at the heart of the most popular mobile OS as well. That is because the people who work on it understand their role. They wanted to abdicate that role with their own Fuchsi

          • Re:

            I love the Windows people who pay for it and enjoy the simplicity of it for what it provides.
            
            Simplicity? I haven't used Windows in at least 20 years, but I do pay attention on what's happening with Windows, and every time a new version comes out there's a huge number of people complaining about how much the UI has changed and how they hate what MS has done. The only times I can remember that happening in Linux are all of the complaints about systemd (I don't like it either, but I learned how to use it

  • Re:

    Except that's not why it doesn't exist, and has even been proposed as a wayland protocol. Wayland doesn't claim "not a Wayland thing", but instead argues that, somehow, this is now simply impossible. Because it only handles rectangular 2D monitors aligned well with x and y axes. They bemoan that by it's nature, it can't be "optional" because if it is possible, then applications will bank on it, and thus "break" when an environment opts out of it. Because it's not perfect, they don't want it at all. All th

• Re: Year of the Wayland desktop...

  Wayland exists because many X.org and Linux desktop devs do not want to continue working on, or depending on X11. Reasons have been expressed elsewhere many times over.

  If x11 works and is all you need, that is great for you. Unfortunately, people who can and will maintain x11 is not increasing, but in fact decreasing. So Wayland will become the future unless more people step up and maintain xorg server.

  The slow development of Wayland is due to the fact that there is almost no money to be had developing th