Wayland seems ready to me but the main problem that many programs are not configured / compiled to support it. Why is that? I know it's not easy as "Wayland support? Yes" (but in many cases adding a flag is enough but maybe it's not a perfect support). What am I missing? Even Blender says if it fails to use Wayland it will use X11.
When Wayland is detected, it is the preferred system, otherwise X11 will be used
Also XWayland has many limitations as X11 does.
Wayland does not work with screen readers like Odilia or Orca. Because Wayland leaves blind users behind, it's a total non-starter.
Wayland "leaves blind users behind" due to its security oriented design. A protocol or portal of some kind is going to need to be created to solve this problem, but progress here is severely lacking.
Not an expert, not an insider. Just commenting to inform about what i know.
When wayland was designed, security was a concern and it was handled differently than in X decades ago. That is good.
Under X any application can be a screenreader and see your data. This was okay when you trusted everything on your machine, but is a problem today.
Under wayland's original design, no application could be a screenreader. That's bad. It took way too long to agree on how to make exceptions to the rule, e.g. for screen readers, screen sharing in video calls, etc.
Because it doesn't matter for most apps. XWayland works fine.
Even Blender says if it fails to use Wayland it will use X11.
What are you trying to say? Of course it does. Pretty much every Linux app still supports X11, because a lot of people are still using X11. Only exception I'm aware of is Waydroid.
I believe Wayland should be the default, but we should have the option to switch to X11 (using XWayland on Wayland) if desired.
good is the enemy of excellent. X11 works for most users (almost all the users?) well. You can see that with the adoptions of other standards like the C++ standards and IPV6 which can feel like forever.
Another thing I think one of the X11 maintainers mentioned iirc is that they have been fairly gentle with deprecation. some commercial company could have deprecated X11 and left you with a wayland session that is inferior in some ways.
Because Wayland is STILL lacking a lot of things that people need.
Could you give me some examples so I can understand what's missing and being waited on?
for one, it's missing a good chunk of A11y stuff, activity watch requires something to monitor the active window, there is a PR for that, still not merged, this has been an issue for years
It's missing protocols that will let applications request to be a privileged application, which is necessary for applications to use other functionality.
Missing protocols to control always-on-top / layers, which is needed for OSKs to function, and a couple other A11y things off the top of my head.
It's not just a11y either, Window positioning still isn't merged, which means if your app opens two "windows", you cannot currently select where to open them, or to even bind two windows together (Android emulator does this for instance).
There is a LOT wayland is missing, it IS getting better, just at a snails pace.
As someone who tries to look under the hood for a lot of the open source software I run, one thing that I have noticed is that there are a lot of cases where the general sentiment seems to be
port to what. Wayland still doesn't support a number of things that some applications require. A lot of developers that I have interacted with would rather have the app run through XWayland rather than have a wayland version of the app with less features or certain features grayed out.In the case of one project in paticular, that being the Sunshine game streaming project. I have personally witnessed. Them implementing a solution for wlroots based compositor. Having that solution eventually break as wlroots based projects deprecate the protocol they were using in favor of a new one and now that protocol is looking like it too is old news and is going to be deprecated in favor of a newer and better protocol. What I am getting at here is that protocols not existing isn't the only problem, but things are still very much in development. Even applications that implemented wayland support are being put in positions where they need yet another rewrite because things are far from finalized and still moving pretty fast.
So summarizing Wayland is not ready yet for everyone and current Wayland support can easily be broken with newer releases?
In the case of one project in paticular, that being the Sunshine game streaming project
That's a terrible example, because they completely ignore the many many years old standardized APIs (screen casting and remote desktop portals) that they could use, in favor of doing hacky and broken things that require root access instead.
Even then, is that a documentation and centralized standards issue? Was there some list they could have/should have looked to that said 'this is how that is implemented on Wayland vs X'?
The github repo has tons of issues about the problems caused by the hacks (from the cursor not being recorded, to it not working in Flatpak, not working with virtual displays, to even preventing graphical sessions from starting!) with the suggested solution of just using the remote desktop portal... I don't know what the problem is, but it's not a lack of knowledge.
It is not enough to make a better product.
It is not enough to create all tooling and libraries to seamlessly migrate to the new product, but it helps.
There also needs to be a great big positive reason to make the change. Paying developers, huge user base, the only hardware support, great visuals, etc.
Until I cannot run software on X11, I won't switch over knowingly.
Once the desktops switch to Wayland and all distros ship with Wayland by default, support should slow.
Ideally, developers stop improving xwayland over time and go into maintenance mode for a bit. Once it goes into maintenance mode, developers should naturally fall off as it winds down.
If every desktop makes a very public announcement about the xwayland protocol being put into maintenance mode, actively supported apps should switch over. It's up to the public how long they want to keep maintaining xwayland (open source etc).
But why would the distros do that? It takes effort and has real costs for them.
They're already starting to go that way, in a couple years Linux mint is even going to support Wayland. Ubuntu and fedora has already defaulted to Wayland. Fedora is actually deprecating xorg in a few releases. Budgie wants to have full support next year.
There isn't much more than the testing they already have to do every release. Infact not having to support legacy code will free up resources for the whole Linux community as well as cutting the time in half for validating packages on distros. Every package that runs on xorg also runs on wayland, they have to test both.
Granted some have custom tools they'll be working on but it's going to be a while before every major DE supports Wayland. I'm curious, you think the distros have to implement their own version of Wayland?
you think the distros have to implement their own version of Wayland?
Nope. They do have to test their own shit.
Why make a change when one can just not?
Considering that Ubuntu, Fedora and any distro with Gnome or KDE as the default DE already come with Wayland as the default, it is clear they have been testing their own shit when it comes to Wayland and then shifting to Wayland by default.
This is a thread about slow uptake by programs of Wayland.
X works for me.
Well it was you who implied that a distro shipping the DE with wayland has to do extra testing that they don't do. I just replied stating that distros are testing and validating for wayland to be the default.
X works for me.
Good. No one is stopping you from using it.
So, even though KDE Plasma has significantly advanced Wayland, a stronger push is still needed to drive the change further.
I don't think kde plasma was the only one. Anyway, it just feels natural for xwayland to stop pushing for feature parody and for focus to switch over to Wayland after a while.
The biggest target for developers is the Ubuntu/Debian platform so their switch to Wayland should motivate other projects and paid applications to at least take notice.
New projects will try to support both but typically will focus more on Wayland. There's already an unintentional incentive to partially support xdg protocols Wayland relies on thanks to flatpak.
xwayland cannot ever be removed, because wayland, by design, will not have enough functionality to replace it. So one can either support X desktop environments with their own individual bugs, or one X implementation that has the needed features and works consistently for all DEs
If developers drop off there's not much we can do. It'll eventually have to be removed or become a bigger security risk than developers say it is already.
Support on the x server itself has dropped off precipitously since Wayland hit the mainstream and most small x11 DEs are trying to build off of WM like wayfire or wlroots.
I do not care about security risks. If something made its way onto my system, I've already lost. I just want one implementation of something that gets the job done. And by "gets the job done" I mean it allows us to do things better, not disallow us from even having the option to do things because someone had their tinfoil hat on too tight. Ffs you can't even set your window icon. I don't care if kde has implemented that feature. If I use that, I'd be supporting kde, not wayland. It won't work on other des and so the maintenance burden increases drastically.
Your arguments kinda weak, no offense. I do have a solution for you though. If you want to stick with a version of Linux that's guaranteed to support xorg for eight years, I'd recommend Rocky linux! When that reaches EOL I guess you could just stay on it.
Enterprise plans on being fully switched over to Wayland by the next major version. You won't be able to install xorg on redhat for example. The biggest contributors to xorg(Enterprise) are going to shift focus to xwayland to support legacy software on wayland.
Besides it's exciting finally catching up to truly hardware accelerated desktops like Mac OS 10.0 and windows vista. At its heart xorg is a purely single threaded software accelerated bitmap based windowing system from 84. They've had to rewrite small but incredibly complex chunks of the code just to try to keep up with the modern world. Just look at the history of 3D acceleration in x11.
Your free to give it a good go though! The very same team that actively maintained xorg threw in the towel ten years ago when they diverted resources towards a new windowing protocol and they're not going back.
new features are fine. But first and foremost, is not breaking existing apps, or committing to porting them yourself. So if desktop apps need to do xyz, then wayland needs to support doing xyz. period. No 'but that's insecure', no 'but why would you want to do that' (for setting a window icon or positioning the window ffs). Support existing applications. I'm not saying it should support x protocols. But it should offer replacement features for existing apps to be ported to. And it needs to be wayland. Because it's already the case that certain functionality is implemented for gnome, or kde, with incompatible apis, to fill in the void left by wayland itself. If I want an app to work as I want it, consistently, everywhere? X, with all its warts, is my only choice.
As an example, the accessibility protocols. They're good to have. Except they're opt-in. So incompatible with existing apps. Some apps need to restrict access. They could declare that and make use of additional functionality. But no, choose a default that break everything instead.
The argument that apps just need to be ported also assumes the app is still maintained. Are you willing to do the work yourself if not? Probably not. You're just the one looking down on people like me for wanting functionality in existing apps to be "not literally impossible to implement"
This whole argument ignores xwayland and the fact that new features are added as a standard of Wayland literally every day.
For as long as xwayland is supported you can use your old apps. Wayland actually supports different window icons for multi window apps. But Wayland has always supported window icons, kde just had an annoying bug they finally fixed. Chromium and electron apps kinda just didn't support window icons very well in wayland for a while.
For accessibility, it's been broken on Linux for literally years but there's an active effort to make it better and more universal than it ever could have been on x11. The effort of building a fully featured accessibility stack is being led by the gnome team with help from the free desktop organization and kde.
This is my last response, this conversation isn't going anywhere anyway. I'm not the one transitioning the Linux world to Wayland, I don't see why you could blame me for it anyhow.
Until I cannot run software on X11, I won't switch over knowingly.
Please explain
Why would someone stay with x even though it's deprecated, architecturally broken and unmaintainable
This is a thread about slow uptake by programs of Wayland.
X works for me.
Right. And I'm interested if there are some legitimate needs for you to run x until it stops working.
Or is this just a revolt?
Is it really ? It works as expected and never crashes. Xorg's git is active.
Xorg was started in 2004 and Wayland in 2008 At this point they're almost the same age..
Depends on the timeline.
X crashed way more for me on kde than Wayland on gnome. 'Never' is quite the statement.
Some applications, such as those with tablet demands, are not met by current wayland des with proper tablet support and xwayland is currently the better option. This may have changed in the last year or so, but this is roughly my recollection of certain big art programs.
Xwayland doesn't get input in some special way, it uses the exact same Wayland protocols to get input events as native Wayland apps. All claims about it being more complete or anything like that are nonsense.
Krita forces Xwayland because they have some X11 specific code they haven't bothered porting away from, that's all.
Oh hey, I love your work on Plasma's HDR and color management. Glad to see you on Lemmy.
Some many specific issues with Wayland... Maybe that's a reason. X11 is a huggeee dependency for a long time.
because for most of them, there is nothing to port them to. Wayland is incomplete... by design.
What are advantages of being
incomplete... by design ?
I know Wayland is simpler but it should cover almost every highly requested feature if developers need it.
You have a gross misunderstanding of what a display fucking system should do. X11 nowadays provides the same thing to apps as Wayland, except some bad design hacks that have become fundamental to writing Linux apps that are essentially workarounds for X11 sucking badly.
NOBODY uses X11's font system or widget system or vector system nowadays. X11 provides you with a render plane and some other bullshit and the toolkit does the rest.
Which is the same as Wayland. Except Wayland actually has a properly designed and standardized way of doing things through the extension system, as in X11 everything is cobbled together from hacks.
A good example is absolute window positioning. Wayland doesn't have it because it's been found that it wasn't actually really needed, people did things that way because something that's essentially a clever hack had become the de facto standard on X11. Same thing with how X11 apps do window captures.
Generally, Wayland is a great leap in Linux desktop system. We're catching up to what MacOS and Windows did 20 fucking years ago.
In my opinion, that's because X11 lacks proper abstract for many things like screenshot, screencast, color managerment and etc, so the applications have to use many X11 implementation details to implement these features. It leads to high-coupling code with X11 so move their code to wayland and ensuring it works correctly and is consistent with the old behavior is difficult.
It is still young and underdeveloped.
It is advertised to be simpler, but I don't understand any of this words thrown in this thread. And I don't care. Pulseaudio and pipewire is still making me troubles, even thou alsa worked without issues for me.
Point it, make it clear and stable and we will come. Until than we will use the beast we know. It os mich easier when there are no options, but Wayland is fighting something that exists and it takes time and effort.
Another problem is they pushed it to early and people got burned. Until I start seeing "I switched to Wayland in one command and everything works" I (as a user) will not touch it (unles my distro decides to drop X).
