X11 Is Quickly Going Into Maintenance Mode, In Favor of Wayland

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=X.Org-Maintenance-Mode-Quickly
blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2019/06/24/on-the-road-to-fedora-workstation-31/

Attached: !.png (1024x1024 883.34 KB, 55.06K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Zsz7Shbnb9c
nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/FeatureMatrix/
nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeNames/
youtube.com/watch?v=NALDNnGdpJ0
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=X.Org-Maintenance-Mode-Quickly
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Waypipe-Wayland-Proxy
github.com/intel/gvt-linux/wiki/Dma_Buf_User_Guide
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_terminal
stackoverflow.com/questions/40260056/opengl-over-ssh-glx
reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/8eql2y/wayland_vs_xorg/
bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103282
gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe/
wayland.freedesktop.org/xserver.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

How is Wayland better than X11? What does it improve or fix?

youtube.com/watch?v=Zsz7Shbnb9c

What the fuck does he mean by bitrot outside of the context of bits getting corrupted in a hard drive over time?

I think he means exactly that. It will be sitting in a hard drive unmantained and will eventually have bitrot.

He may also be implying that any new bugs found in it won't get fixed.

We're talking about a package in a distributed network where literal bitrot will get noticed. It can't mean that.

No backwards compatibility garbage of copying a framebuffer atleast three different times in memory just to display it. That said I have yet to find a wayland enviroment lighter then openbox+x11. So redhat can shove it where the sun don't shine till someone makes the equivelent to openbox+x11 in wayland.

Its heavily implieing that redhat will sabotage the project. There's been new features submitted upstream to xorg that aren't going to be put out to release to distros unless you clone and compile the xorg source code yourself. It might go the way of packages that have distro specific patches to maintain it and you just cherry pick between all those for the best build.

Fun fact, building xorg for mac osx requires propietary software now even though it used to be possible to compile it without propietary software. Yet it is still liscensed under the GPL2 and no one has filed a complaint. I wonder (((why))) that is?

Well I don't have an answer for that, but if you're looking for a minimal autist WM type experience and don't mind going tiling, check out Sway. Haven't gotten the chance myself (damn you, NVIDIA!), but it's basically a clone of i3wm.

Jesús Cristo Nuestro Señor. Big if true

muh vidya

AMD and nouveau work fine for vidya with the right cards. Just do your research before buying hardware next time you faggot.

alright so i checked
nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/FeatureMatrix/
and
nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeNames/
which looks like support is well enough upto "NVF0" chipsets but lacking some features.
Acording to this "NVE0" which is the chipset my Geforce 750 would be using should be in the well enough supported range. Which is funny because last time i used nouveau it ran like dogshit.
However, that was with Linux 4.9 A long term release kernel.
So will it work better if i use the latest Linux 5.0?
I don't know what version of nouveau i was using last time and if it has improved.
I don't see any benchmarks or any indectation of how much is implemented vs what i'd get using the proprietary.
The one problem i see is listed on the martix that i'd get no video acceleration. Which sucks cause i use that heavily.

Nouveau isn't directly connected to Linux. Linux isn't much of a performance bottleneck for how Nouveau works. The reason why Nouveau drivers are slow compared to Nvidia's driver is because the Nouveau team do not have access to the complete knowledge that would take full advantage of the hardware. What they do is reverse engineer what Nvidia does and that is a long painful process in the world of programming.

Alright, i get that.
The only reason i mentioned linux was because i got my nouveau driver bundled with the kernel/kernel modules at that point. And it was running an older release without dkms. Which i assume would require a older version of nouveau.
I want to reiterate that i just want to know how much has nouveau improved in it's rendering capabilites since that inital release?

I'd really like to use nouveau if it runs well enough i might make a full switch to wayland/wlroots.

I do not run Nouveau and I am making a complete guess here: the Nouveau driver performance speeds for your hardware have not increased by any significant amount since the drivers of Linux 4.9. I would bet that if you run it today, you will get comparable performance as you have in the past with Linux 4.9. For a project like Nouveau, you measure the project speed in the frame of four or five years.

Extremely. If you use the NVE0 family with a newer linux kernel and newer mesa you can run just about everything emulated game wise at 1080p 60fps. Its of course improving all the time unlike the blob which recently reduced the performance for users of NVE0 and older hardware, for no reason whatsoever. There's some workloads where nouveau now beats the blob like synthetic benchmarks.

It should go without saying you are using gentoo. Why use later nvidia hardware when they will just reduce or remove the ability to use their blob as time goes on? Why use amd or intel hardware that could do the same thing....

I have a GTX 650, and nouveau always locks up my whole system after awhile. It's watching video that seems to do it. If I don't watch video the system will be fine for days. If I start watching video it will crash. Not right away, but after a certain amount of video the whole system locks up, and there is nothing in the logs. I should just get a cheap low end AMD card since I don't game anymore, but I'm a poorfag and can't justify the expense.

It could be anything until you prove the cause. Perhaps it is the drivers, perhaps your system configuration is broken, or perhaps the hardware is faulty. I can tell you this, Nouveau is far more stable on Linux and Unix desktops than Nvidia drivers.

who is that qt gril?

OpenBSD already has its own fork, so we can just use that. Also it's safer, as pointed out by this security researcher:
youtube.com/watch?v=NALDNnGdpJ0
Also you can use the vesa or wsfb driver for additional protection (like mentioned by one guy at the end of the talk), and that's how I've been running X for over 10 years, since I don't have any need for GPU.

Attached: apollo workstation.png (1024x800, 15.99K)

me

It's always done it no matter what distro I use. If it's caused by a configuration issue, it must be a very common config. Like I said, one of these days I'll get a low/mid end AMD card and be done with it. My laptop has AMD graphics and the foss driver works just fine.

I'll switch to wayland when:
* bspwc is done
* lemonbar, st, sxhkd and redshift get ported

Honestly, OpenBSD is more and more appealing every day, but the lack of performances, good FS and port manager (at least as good as the other BSDs or Portage) is too big for my boihole.

They're not focussed on performance or filesystem features, and probably never will be. But I'm guessing the other BSDs will use their Xenocara fork if Xorg goes full retard.

Xorg isn't going to do anything other than continue to be maintained. There will be no more improvements to Xorg because there is nothing left to do that won't require significant rearchitecting of the Xorg codebase structure. At this time, only bugfixes will happen to Xorg.

Sure, and people are free to install other init than systemd on debian too. Technically they can, just like technically maybe they'll maintain the Xorg. But technicals are shallow, and it's the spirit and intent that matters.

An M looks like an upside-down W, or "double-U", and the number of letters separating M from P is exactly two. From this we may conclude that Wayland is a steaming pile of Poo.

But will IBM sabotage red hat first?

Batman shouldn't you be giving Poettering the punishment you usually dish out to the Riddler?
Because I swear SystemD is one big clusterfuck of a feature creeping enigma.

This is a good thing, X is a mess.

Wayland is different from systemd, because it doesn't have so many dependencies as systemd does and wayland does one thing and probably does it well, unlike systemd. And AFAIK Google's fuchsia uses wayland, so it seems to be easier to port to other systems/kernels, whereas systemd is Linux-specific.

...

HOW THE FUCK AM I SUPPOSED TO LAUNCH A GUI APPLICATION REMOTELY WITH X11 FORWARDING OVER SSH
i do this rarely but the state of performance with anything else is terrible; I do not want to have to launch of a full VNC slideshow session.

this is literally the only X11 vs wayland issue i care about.

>phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=X.Org-Maintenance-Mode-Quickly

Attached: kikeotron.png (1072x316, 33.03K)

just vnc lol it's super performant and basically the same thing t. wayland fanboy

I can't believe this shit is still being trotted out every time.

X11 was designed and written in the 1980s. The computer world was completely different as it is today and so were the needs of the time. Right now X11 is simply unsuitable for modern desktop use and patching it further is not a suitable solution.

X11 devs have been trying to fix X11 for decades now (at one point X11 had over one million LoC, right now its sitting at 600000) until they realized that the most sensible solution would be to write a new server from scratch.

Most of these issues are solved by Wayland, while others (like leaving window managers/toolkits to render fonts) are kept. Wayland has its own set of issues like making it extremely hard to implement screenshots, screen sharing or limiting FPS to 60 by design; in this sense Mir would've been a better solution, but X11 must die.

Attached: TheMark.jpg (493x639, 36.75K)

You can still use X11. Nobody is taking it away.

What spirit and intent of Xorg do you want? What extra features that you want Xorg to do that it doesn't do?

Good news, they just figured that out
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Waypipe-Wayland-Proxy

X used to be simple, but those idiots made it a mess with all their extentions and other garbage. The dude in the CCC talk explains it, when he compares the old XFree86 before all that shit to the newer overcomplicated crap.
But now those same idiots are saying it's time to start over with their new design, and some people trust them to do something right, when they never bothered to fix their old mistakes. They never even took the code that OpenBSD offered that fixed many of their bugs. That's how little they care about making good software.
^ that's from wikipedia, but the dude in the talk says pretty much the same thing: just use OpenBSD's code! They fixed many bugs already! Nope, the Xorg fucks don't want to fix bugs and don't care about software quality. They're not going to suddendly start caring about it now.

Not the spirit of Xorg, but rather the mentality of the developpers. They "retire" X so they can push they new pet project. Obviously they have even less incentive to fix Xorg bugs now, especially since they don't want to deal with the mess they made. So now they're going to go make another big mess.

No screen tearing, more responsive, less bulky. It just werks. I ditched i3 for Sway, its fucking great.

The X.org team actually removed and rewrote thousands of LoC. X11 was over one million LoC before X.org was a thing, and now its less than 600000.

X11 is an overcomplicated mess because it was made with timeshare systems in mind, not PCs. And as such most of the features a modern desktop system needs (different inputs, multiple screens, high DPI, vsync, aliased fonts etc.) Have to be added as patches so legacy programs don't break. As such, X11 is nothing but a bunch of patches intertwined with more patches on top of a server made with 1970s timeshare systems in mind.
It doesn't fix the problems of X11 as a modern display server because those exist by design. Patching a few bugs is pretty much meaningless when X11 protocol itself is rubbish.

these issues being unresolved doesn't look smart. why are so many people fucking things up? this is a lesson in democracy and mediocrity

2bwm, nothing else compares

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man

X didn't need to become a modern display wankery. It was fine the way it was before the "user-friendly" Linux desktop environment craze to "take over the world" and compete with Windows happened. It was better back when people made fun of Linux or never heard of it. That kept the subversive elements away.
All these years I never cared about any of the list of stuff you mentioned. I can display some Xterms and a few other clients? That's all that matters.

Attached: amix_1.jpg (1280x960, 282.31K)

I use X2Go on my servers, there's some applications that really benefit from having a GUI

Holdup. Why the fuck is this a thing? Why can't this be changed and yet assure no tearing?

Only the proprietary VNC implementations do that.
Having to use a cracked and "no phoning home" patched RealVNC server binary sucks.

I was shitposting. The "just use VNC" meme pisses me off to no end, it's blatantly obvious that the people advocating it have never used network transparency if they think the two are comparable.

TBPH I don't even care that much about network transparency.
It's just a simple fact that applications talk over the network BY FUCKING BITMAPS BEING THROWN AROUND when they don't have to (and you really have to do it only if you do some graphical shit like photoshop or something) is absolutely retarded.
Like, don't people realize that communicating with some sort of primitives or maybe toolkit elements being thrown around (like, draw this field/checkbox/dropdown menu here) is much better?
X did something right in the beginning, but then it all went to shit with those bitmaps, and VNC did not fix shit. And don't give me the BS about how it all is compressed/cached - it's still not a fucking excuse.

there's a bunch of toolkits though and a bunch of versions of these toolkits. I don't know how X does it at a lower level, presumably all these toolkits (GTK/qt/etc) boil down to X commands and that is what's being thrown around; but then there's also windows/osx compatibility.

As far as I know windows RDP does exactly this, but it only deals with windows clearly.

I don't really care about all the full network shit with X either. I've tried setting up another monitor over the network with X and it was a slideshow even over a LAN, performance was worse than VNC. All I want to do is run a gui program remotely.

This VNC/remote display performance problem is not just unique to the network; it's a problem with VMs too. You can run spice over the network too, but it's again; slow (opengl acceleration only works over sockets not TCP).

This problem is demonstrated clearly with the disaster of intel gvt-g (passthrough like shit for VMs on intel chips; only it's not passthrough you can share the video card with the VM and get true acceleration). It actually does work except for the fact of actually displaying the content. You still have to pump this over VNC.
Even following this guide; assuming you can get it to work
github.com/intel/gvt-linux/wiki/Dma_Buf_User_Guide
performance is terrible.

Performance inside of the VM is fine; even games or whatever, your getting the fps inside of the VM, but you cannot display it reliably on the host with any speed.

The reason toolkits throw around bitmaps is muh antialiased fonts. Not defending it at all, just as a note.

And that's a fucking problem!
Either we do it by having One True Network-aware Toolkit (well, we may have dozens, but consider all the wasted effort) or we design a system in a way that deals with it itself. Guess which one is easier to implement and use, probably.
I think X primitives and stuff only work with generic tools and resources that are supplied with X. All 3rd-party toolkits must throw bitmaps around, I am pretty sure. That's why you usually hear only some simple-setup-with-Emacs-over-SSH people caring about the shit.
I dunno, I don't think so. Windows is way too diverse for it to be a thing.

This should be easy to work around by providing a way to communicate antialiasing/hinting methods and shit over the network, and then the client just doing it locally.
The problem arises if we don't have a consistent platform though. Like, if there are different fonts present or font renderers are not the same etc. It still could be handled in a way of graceful degrading or something. Like, we have Web shit delivering meaningful content over a variety of browser vendors and operating systems, why cannot it be done for desktop programs? It was done for online realtime games FFS.

Yes, but retrofitting this onto X11 was apparently really hard.

It's also nice for OS hobbyists, they don't have to write their own graphics stack. The Symbolics MacIvory is an example of a commercial product that did this.

You're doing something wrong if it's that slow. I played Quake over X in 1996. I had a 486 which was too slow, but another computer on LAN was a Pentium and I could play the game fine by telnetting to that computer, setting DISPLAY environment and running the game. Of course the sound was coming from the other room, but hey I could play the game! In comparison, my 486 running quake locally got about 3 fps or something like that. Now that was a slideshow!
Oh, and this was a 10base2 network, and we had NE2000 ISA cards, nothing fancy.

I don't believe this shit for a second because I didn't do stuff like that, but let's try to number that shit.
640 * 480 pixels (reasonable resolution) * 16 bit per pixel (i dunno how many it was, but I highly doubt it was 24 bpp) * 11 fps (reasonable rate at the time) = 54067200 (54M) bits per second, which is 5 times more than your network capacity, meaning that it must have worked with something other than bitmaps or I didn't do my assumptions correctly.
Anyway, with modern desktops it's even worse. 1920 * 1080 * 24 * 60 = 2985984000 (2.9G) bits per second, which exceeds 1Gbit network capacity even @30fps.

Wayland was made with two goals in mind:
This design has the advantage of making every frame, well, perfect. The disadvantage is that, well, it's not suitable for barcode gayming.

Wayland devs went for the 60 FPS so the desktop animations and video playback was smooth and perfect, but they obviously didn't consider gaming at all. Another supposed problem is that Wayland works by rasterization, which supposedly introduces problems with scaling, rotating and tranforming content. But I don't really get it.

I imagine it would be possible for a compositor to run at a higher FPS since compositors are what implement the protocol.

Then keep running X11. Those are all legit complains and many use cases (particularly multi-monitor and multi-user support) are a shitshow. Even fucking Windows has better window composition.

it's trash, but so is X11

Quake runs at 320x200, brainiac. Also default X depth back then was 8 bpp, and Quake didn't use any more colors than that. For that matter, XDoom itself *required* an 8 bpp display, as did various other games of the era.
Also I'm not a liar, and you're very much a newfag and never did jack shit in X if you think this is a lie. Anyway your attitude that X network transparency is broken doesn't even pass the most basic of logic tests. If it didn't work, and everything was a "slideshow" like you think, then it wouldn't have become so widespread, and there wouldn't have been motherfucking X Terminals. Fucking brainic newfags, man. You must be a Wayland developper.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_terminal

Though this shit stackoverflow.com/questions/40260056/opengl-over-ssh-glx hints that the GLX extension to X actually worked indirectly, probably meaning you could send OpenGL commands over the network, meaning that full frames would not be necessary.
That's pretty crazy and also it says DRI just doesn't support that, and DRI is what is used nowadays, and desktop apps are not OpenGL apps necessarily, so I guess you were lucky.

--->

I'm not the slideshow guy, I'm just wrong with my numbers and I've never used a resolution less than 640x480 in my life.
Anyway your numbers make your proposition fine even for full frames, but my calculations regarding modern desktop must be correct too, unless proven otherwise.
Well, of course full frames don't have to be communicated over the network in X, but again, they probably have to in general case of modern X applications.

And I swear to FUCK man, why do I have to solve a dnsbls for every onion post and why did CM abandon the development/maintainence of this shit?

It probably depends on what kind of X client you're trying to run. Firefox runs slowish for me over remote X (over ssh), but then again it also runs slowish on that computer to begin with (it's an A20 ARM SBC), so I'm not surprised. OTOH, LibreOffice felt quite a bit snappier under the same conditions when I tried it. But I ditched that anyway and went to LaTeX, since that's nicer to work with. Otherwise I don't do much except use Xpdf remotely, and it runs more or less the same as on the remote machine, which isn't terribly fast since as I mentioned it's an A20 ARM SoC. Anyway it does what I need it to do, basically.

Is there a source on this? I tried to look it up quickly and failed.

Anyway, it's shit if true. It seems like main loonix graphic stack development revolves around RHEL/CentOS using sysadmins and their needs LMAO

Does this REALLY surprise you?

Attached: 1551182875198.jpg (500x500, 49.53K)

I wasn't even acting surprised. It just shows that Wayland seems to be tailored to the needs of particular audience with the way it is lacking, and these people seem to be a good match. Like, sysadmin wouldn't mess around with a system in general, probably. He would just take the default Gnome Shell with whatever apps (Gnome Environment may be retarded, but it's feature-complete at least) and do shit with it. You only really need a terminal emulator, after all. Then you take their mail client and you're set as fuck.

I'm good, thanks.

That's great but will it have an interface for screen recorders like OBS?

I'm good, thanks

uh... yeah? cause the compositor is the display server...

That's kind of the whole point of wayland. I for one welcome our tear free overlords.
seriously, though. I never had a graphics card that didn't tear in linux without compositing and vsync.

Why would sysadmin run all those bloats made for normies? When I had that kind of job, I used blackbox/fluxbox. Even just the text console sufficed in most cases.

Sysadmins wouldn't feel the incentive to trim the UI stuff down really. Well, unless their PC is shit from the early 00s.
And sysadmins ARE normies.

Anyway these
reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/8eql2y/wayland_vs_xorg/
bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103282
tell that wayland itself doesn't have the lock. It's Gnome Shell and xwayland that do (well, the link from bugs.fdo says it was fixed).

Well, that's good to hear.

And with this project: gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe/ the network problem may be fixed too.

So it seems all the Wayland problems are being solved one by one.

Bitches don't know about my X11 client for Wayland
wayland.freedesktop.org/xserver.html

That is apparently just a wrapper that puts X into a sort of transparent root window mode that runs ontop of wayland.
Obviously that's a bit inefficent but i don't really expect them to reimplement the entirety of X at this point just to get people to stop using X.

Nobody is trying to get rid of X11 despite the fears of the FUD meisters ITT. Wayland was never designed or intended to get rid of X11. The purpose of Wayland is to implement a way to compose graphical windows in a way that did not rely on the X11 protocol. The idea is that if you really wanted to, there was nothing stopping people to run an X client on top of Wayland. The X11 functionality was intended to be an option for those who need it and not a mandatory requirement for those who don't need it.

It didn't use to be that way before all those desktop environments, but whatever. I'm glad I left Linux behind over a decade ago. And if Open/NetBSD become cucked, I'll move on as well. Would have adopted Windows if I wanted normie freedesktop.org and SystemD type bullshit.

But that's just adding layers of complexity for no good reason. If someone really wanted to use x11 they wouldn't even bother with wayland or a wayland compositor in the first place. They would just run X11.
I don't believe in the X11 is going to die meme, because it's currently and probably will stay the most used display standard on *nix systems. It has historically so much support that dropping it randomly would throw away more than half of *nix programs.
Considering that linux still uses a directory structure based on unix because of large support i would think this would be a similar situation.
The thing i do think is rediculious is having distros drop any x11 version what so ever in favor of wayland+xwayland. If someone is in the rare situation looking for pure fps performance in something like video games, and obviously wine isn't going to get ported to gtk3 anytime soon. There is a good argument for providing a version without wayland and sticking with a pure x11 setup.
The performance overhead caused by running a graphics stack ontop of yet another graphics stack does cause a good amount of slow downs to justify it. For people who never used linux for games it's understandable.
The reason i think people are concerned about wayland "replacing X" is generally out of experience of how linux development works.
When something new comes out there will inevitably be that ONE program that uses it and only uses it. Which will make users of pure x11 feel obligated to "upgrading" to wayland+x11 and so on.

I think the argument on both sides is being played wrong, wayland either needs to go all the way with replacing X and find some way to get rid of the overhead or X needs to become better or capable of running wayland under it as a way of removing or hacking around the overhead.
As is, wayland is a solution to a problem that most endusers were never aware of, so it's push seems irregular when it isn't actually irregular at all. And the performance hit will cause backlash despite it actually being faster if the application was native to wayland.
Most people look at xwayland not as a just reason to use wayland, but a reason to hate it.

You can try and make another initramfs that blacklists nvidia's own modules and only loads nouveau to boot into a wayland system without having to switch over the whole system

lol. I'm just a larper, but it would be cool if someone made waylandx, and X wrapper around wayland, instead of the other way around.

Aside from being the result of bugs rather than intentional design, from what I can tell, this seems to be confined to downstream from Wayland, at the compositor or DE level, rather than a flaw of Wayland itself.

It breaks everything, even inputting uppercase characters. That's how shit wayland is.

Attached: 1385667269177.gif (480x270, 591.12K)

Haha user, why aren't you using a toolkit? Look there is one maintained by one of the biggest groups inside the same organization that made Wayland!

last I checked, it's fucking shit.
mouse sensitivity issues with any laptop touchpad (synaptics/elantech/anything)
usb mouse have weird 'hardcoded setting' for acceleration and smoothing that's unplayable for even a board game. makes good mouse a shit for no reason.
also, wacom devices barely work with x11 and you can only imagine how wayland handles it - it doesn't.

they're outright telling us that they could shit up the code
classic cianigger
more like botnet, that is where the future is, and systemd too because you're the same CIA niggers trying to fuck up foss for years.