Re: *****SPAM***** Re: [Sawfish] wayland support?

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]

The "problem" with Wayland is that it is just a protocol. So there is
no such thing anymore as a window manager on Wayland, there are just
different compositors which do *everything*, from providing drawing
capabilities to handling input, configuration and windows. There are
efforts to extract most of these into libraries, though, but with other
downsides, for example libinput has a lot of hardcoded assumptions.

I don't know if something like the Wayland-X bridge can be used, getting
Sawfish "natively" on Wayland would require to write a complete
compositor for Wayland, which for sure is neither trivial nor easy.

Also I'd like to take the opportunity to remind everyone that X is
going *nowhere* within the next two to three decades at least. I
mean, it could happen that some people like Gnome drop support for it
within the next years, but I hope that's not going to happen because
that would be pretty fatal to the Linux application ecosystem as a
whole (a friendly reminder that Mir *is* a thing, and currently there
is only a Mir-X bridge). So I hope nobody is that stupid.

My personal opinion on Wayland is quite bleak, actually. It feels like
it is tailored towards a mobile environment in which no application is
trustable, similar to the sandbox and all-in-one package movements
which seem to endorse a "download some completely random application
from the interwebs and don't worry when running it" mentality. Which is
in extreme contrast to what has been pushed in the last decades, "you
can trust any application you run as long as it is coming from the
official repository". That means that a Wayland compositor must bring
all the functionality which are currently provided by different tools,
because nothing is allowed to temper with the compositor or other

Having a nice compositor would be cool, but Wayland comes, in my
opinion, with a pretty hefty price tag.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:45:56 +0100
Jan Kasprzak <kas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 	Hello,
> Trevor Cordes wrote:
> : Is work being done on making a "sawfish for wayland"?  Since wayland
> : doesn't access wm's like X does, it looks like "wm-like" things
> have to : be rewritten and merged somehow into wayland.
> : 
> : It sounds like enlightenment is already working in wayland, so I
> : suppose it is possible.
> 	This is a question I wanted to ask for some time as well.
> GTK supports Wayland, but I am not sure about how WMs are supposed
> to work in Wayland.
> : It looks like with Fedora 25 defaulting to wayland that in about 7-8
> : months when F24 goes EOL I'll be forced into wayland whether I like
> it : or not.
> 	Speaking as a Fedora 25 user: there is no problem with Sawfish
> (+XFCE, in my case) on Fedora 25. It apparently uses Wayland only for
> GNOME-only setups. My lightdm starts the X server and XFCE session
> just fine, as it did in previous releases. My F25 systems run Xorg
> just fine (including a dual-seat workstation at home).
> :  Even if (?) F25 allows you to switch to X (not X in wayland,
> : but pure X-only), all the desktop apps will start to be developed
> and : maintained with wayland in mind.  That means even if I can
> stick with : X for a couple of Fedora revs, the X versions of things
> will get : buggier and no one on bz will care.  Kind of like the
> 32-bit kernel : today.
> 	I guess the biggest push would not be from desktops being
> developed for Wayland, but from drivers for newer hardware being
> developed for Wayland. It is not a problem yet, but I think it will
> be.
> : If anyone has some insights into these things, I'd love to hear
> them! : Anything to keep my hopes up.  -- Signed: a happy X user that
> sees : absolutely no value-add for wayland in his happy 2D-only
> sawfish life.
> 	+1.
> -Yenya

Sawfish ML

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+