Slashdot Mirror
Wayland 1.4 Released — Touch, Sub-Surface Protocol, Crop/Scale Support
An anonymous reader writes "Version 1.4 of the Wayland protocol and Weston reference compositor have been released. The Wayland/Weston 1.4 release delivers on many features and includes promoting the sub-surface protocol to official Wayland, improved touch screen support, a crop/scale protocol within Weston, security improvements, and other fixes."
Just to preclude about half of the coming threads.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
The wayland repository continues to mature and moves slowly. This cycle again only saw a few wayland changes, most of which where fairly unexciting:
- SHM Buffer SIBGUS protection. We added and couple of utility functions to help compositors guard against broken or malicious clients who could truncate the backing file for shm buffers and thus trigger SIGBUS in the compositor (Neil Roberts).
- Subsurfaces protocol moved to wayland repo and as such promoted to official wayland protocol (Pekka Paalanen).
- wl_proxy_set_queue() can take a NULL queue to reset back to default queue. (Neil Roberts).
- A few bug fixes, in particular, I'd like highlight the fix for the race between wl_proxy_create() and wl_proxy_marshal().
- A few scanner error message improvements and documentation tweaks and polish.
I'm hoping the Maui Project (which uses Wayland) can continue to gain momentum as Wayland does and that it becomes a viable option in the next few years.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
3+ monitor support??
Will Wayland have a "X forwarding" kind of feature?
Fix the fucking manual? Fixed that for manual? First Time Film Makers? Florida Thoroughbred Farm Managers? I don't understand. WTF R U TRYING TO SAY MAN.
So...there's that.
Hey guys, what happened to explaining what something might be on the front page description? I'll be flogged for this and called a troll but I've got no idea what this might be. And I'm sure that I'm not alone.
My god, have you ever had to use VNC? It shits buckets of vomit even over excellent LAN connections. You can literally put a two-foot crossover cable between one powerful desktop system and another, use optimized VNC clients and servers with the optimal settings, and yet still get a godawful experience.
Yet back in the early 1990s we could use X apps on our Sun workstations from our New York office, even when they were running on systems in California and Texas. This was without any delay, on computers that make smartwatches look like supercomputers, over shitty ISDN connections.
VNC in early 2014 still can't reliably replicate the excellent experience X provided back in 1992, for crying out loud. If VNC can't do it after decades of trying, why the fuck should I believe that the Wayland crew can pull it off with only a few years of effort?
Please.
It's VNC-like, not VNC. VNC sucks donkey balls, but that's because it's done in an absolutely insane way where it actually does continuous screen-grabs (of the whole screen), encodes them as JPGs and then sends them over the wire.
The wayland version of this is much, much less braindead.
Wake me up when they actually support another operating system. Until then, it's a linuxism.
You're right on the mark. This is why the Wayland attempt is going to fail. They're going to do what the VNC crowd has already tried, and they're going to fail in exactly the same way. There's only one correct way to do this, and that's the way that X did it. Either you do it the same way as X and succeed, or you do it any other way and fail miserably.
Keith Packard saying "keep up the good work" is NOT some guys who worked on Xorg/X11 for years redesigning it to make it better. Some fanboys like to pretend it's so but that's just misleading name dropping.
What did happen is a guy who wrote an extension to X recently decided he'd do his own project which differs from X in many ways.
It's really about putting stuff into a framebuffer instead of the more complex X framework. That pushed a lot more complexity back onto the writers of the applications but there's hope (and some evidence) that writers of toolkits such as Qt will pick up the slack.
Wayland as a replacement for the X protocol does not define a lot of the functionality of X but rather puts it to the client. It's up to the Wayland client implementation to define things like remote display.
Weston has two network backends in its code base which are being worked on. One is their own implementation of something similar to VNC much the same way X currently does remote rendering but with the advantage of compression, and the other is an implementation of FreeRDP.
In any case it's not's Wayland providing remote X it's the client.
Err, I don't know why you put it in such thin terms. Qt has pretty thoroughly integrated support for Wayland via QtWayland, which lets you write your own Wayland compositor using the QtCompositor class.
Architectures like Wayland directly benefit toolkits like Qt because it directly services what Qt was doing already: rendering in a buffer and displaying it.
I don't know if y'all know this, but there is only one clipboard in Wayland. You're going to have to get used to having both middle click and ctrl-v pointing to the same thing.
the [team] behind wayland are the exact same developers who [messed] up X11 by trying to move it to sending image buffers instead of primatives
It was either that or include a virtual machine of some sort in the X server so that new primitives could be defined, much as HTML5 does with JavaScript and the 2D canvas API. How would you have preferred to implement that? At least image buffers are slightly less likely to cause a security hole than a Lua, Forth, Java, JavaScript, or whatever VM.
Because there is still some way to go before there is a fully functional Wayland environment.
I tried to go for maximum bland to avoid pissing off the thin skinned but it appears that even faint praise is taken as some sort of attack. Am I supposed to wave my arms and shout "X sux - go Wayland!" like the mindless fanboys?
That's been done. It's called Linux Mint.
There's already fully functional Wayland environments, it's shipping on at least one vehicle IVI system and Jolla's handset. What's missing is distro adoption, but even that's inevitable. Far from the "hope" that toolkits will take up the slack -- they already have.
Are you so sensitive that you take simple replies as attacks?
You are the one with the "thin terms" when I was just stating it simply. Don't try and throw it back on me that I'm not cheering for your obsession.
Links please for that shipping system. I find it difficult to believe that there has been that much progress in a couple of months and annoying fanboys have been caught out with lies about Wayland here before, so I can't take you at your word until I know you are more than that.
Today's moderators don't seem to have a clue, the above post is not funny but deeply insightful.
I feel so sig.
No, you are misleading.
If you take a look at Wayland source code, you'll see stuff like Copyright © 1988-2004 Keith Packard and Bart Massey. quite often.
https://gitorious.org/wayland/wayland/source/0b29a2fec7801d2530bd004ae68eb9242417bafd:wayland/wayland-hash.c#L2-3
As for pushing back work to the toolkit developers, the Qt developers made the software (client side) backend the default back in Qt 4.4, because it was so much faster than the XRender based one for local clients.
And for Qt5, they simply didn't bother to implement a XRender based one.
http://jolla.com/
It's been shipping since the December 2013, using Wayland and Qt5. No X compatibility layer on this device.
You've got to be joking - a domain instead of the actual information?
How low can you get.
If you are going to lie then try something a bit less obvious.
How the hell did this Wayland project turn into such a ball of hate against X where people decided that any dirty trick in advocacy goes?
The hate actually is coming from the people who are feeling threatened by Wayland. The rest of us either understand the issues, and the advantages offered by this change, or are content to trust the experts, or realize that Wayland is years away from being the default in major distributions. Presumably, due to the vociferous element, it will not become default until ssh forwarding works reliably. Well, Fedora might jump at it, but anyone who uses a bleeding-edge distribution and does not expect occasional loss of functionality is a fool.
I don't know what lies you're referring to, the link given does contain the copyright attribution. That's at least a good indication that the project is using Mr. Packard's code, and I submit that neither of us is familiar enough with the respective X and Wayland codebases as to be able to substantiate any claim otherwise. From my experience rewriting applications though, I can say that to the pragmatic developer, code reuse is a virtue.
I don't really care who is writing the code, personally, and you only mention it as an attack ad hominem. Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over. Then perhaps you can either act on your concerns, or be content to let the project succeed or fail of its own accord.