Wayland breaks screen recording applications Yet this would imho be required if they want to make it into a worthwile "successor" that would have any chance of ever fixing the many Wayland issues at the core. This summarizes it very well: Īpparently the Wayland project doesn't even want to be "X.org 2.0", and doesn't want to provide a commonly used implementation of a compositor that could be used by everyone. As a result, the same basic features get implemented differently in different window managers, with different behaviors and bugs - so what works on desktop environment A does not necessarily work in desktop environment B (e.g., often you hear that something "works in Wayland", even though it only really works on Gnome and KDE, not in all Wayland implementations). It offloads a lot of work to each and every window manager.There is not one /usr/bin/wayland display server application that is desktop environment agnostic and is used by everyone (unlike with Xorg).You cannot do a lot of things that you can do in Xorg by design.A crash in the window manager takes down all running applications.Let's propose the missing Wayland protocols for full X11 feature parity. That people also have displays on their fridge doesn't matter the least bit in that context of discussion. And maybe "the Wayland folks" don't "only care about Gnome", but then, any fix that is done in Gnome's Wayland implementation isn't automatically going to benefit all users of Wayland-based software, and possibly isn't even the implementation "the Wayland folks" would necessarily recommend.Įdit 12/2023: If something wants to replace X11 for desktop computers (such as professional Unix workstations), then it better support all needed features (and key concepts, like windows) for that use case. Today I realize that you can't "install Wayland", because unlike Xorg, there is not one "Wayland display server" but actually every desktop envrironment has its own. They assume everyone is happy to either rewrite everything or to just use Gnome on Linux (rather than, say, twm with ROX Filer on NetBSD).Įdit: When I wrote the above, I didn't really realize what Wayland even was, I just noticed that some distributions (like Fedora) started pushing it onto me and things didn't work properly there. Wayland seems to be made by people who do not care for existing software. Or force more Red Hat/Gnome components (glib, Portals, Pipewire) on everyone! And unlike X11 (the X Window System), Wayland protocol designers actively avoid the concept of "windows" (making up incomprehensible words like " xdg_toplevel" instead).ĭO NOT USE A WAYLAND SESSION! Let Wayland not destroy everything and then have other people fix the damage it caused. It is merely an incompatible alternative, and not even one that has (nor wants to have) feature parity ( missing features). Wayland proponents make it seem like Wayland is "the successor" of Xorg, when in fact it is not. And usually it stays broken, because the Wayland folks mostly seem to care about Automotive, Gnome, maybe KDE - and alienating everyone else (e.g., people using just an X11 window manager or something like GNUstep) in the process. Even the most basic, most simple things (like xkill) - in this case with no obvious replacement. Wayland solves no issues I have but breaks almost everything I need. Hence, if you are interested in existing applications to "just work" without the need for adjustments, then you may be better off avoiding Wayland.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |