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.
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.
Yes. It's on the road map.
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.
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.
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.
> Wayland probably won't be able to perfectly replicate your perfect 1992 X experience, because nobody (who isn't the kind of fucking retard who runs shit remotely just to make themselves feel like one computer isn't enough power for them) gives a shit about doing that kind of thing any more.
What hole have you been hiding in?
Remote desktops are all the rage now. They are very common in corporations and even "regular people" are using them.
The rest of the world has caught up to the 1992 X experience. Now clueless nitwits want to set us back 30 years because they think it's trendy or some such.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
...and here is another problem with this kind of half-baked nonsense.
Linux benefits from being just another Linux. It may not be "certified" but it is close enough to the other real Unixen that it can be treated as one of the fold.
Nonsense like this just widens the distance between Linux and other Unix.
If I wanted Apple style nonsense, I would use a Mac.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Yeah a retard who is trying to figure out why an aircraft wing starts fluttering via a CFD simulation on TACC's Stampede or maybe trying to determine where the asbestos fibers from explosion in the densest part of a major US city are going to disperse to via a dispersion model on NCAR's Yellowstone. Yeah I'm some "kind of fucking retard who runs shit remotely just to make themselves feel like one computer isn't enough power for them", because even with 72286 cores my jobs still take hours to run and the output is tens of terabytes. Try using using a visualization tool at a remote site with vnc and then try it with ssh and X forwarding. Obviously another linsux fanboi who's claim to fame is yet another theme for gnome3 and who has no idea what a computer might be used for other than updating his facebook page.
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.
What does Lennart have to do with this? Jeez, you're ready to accuse him of breaking X now?
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?
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.
So if we'll just shut up and jump, they pinky swear that they'll meet us half way down with a parachute?
Today's moderators don't seem to have a clue, the above post is not funny but deeply insightful.
I feel so sig.
I am pretty sure he will slip a systemd dependency into wayland somehow. Wayland is developed by xorg developers and will eventually replace xorg, so yes. :-)
I feel so sig.
Remote desktops are a stop-gap for people using shitty apps that don't have any better kind of network functionality designed in, or people trying to uninstall browser toolbars off gramma's old pc. Nobody *wants* to use them.
Just like nobody wants to go back to shitty-looking Motif desktops because they're fucking eyesores. But no, we should bin off pointless frivolities such as anti-aliased fonts and go back to 8-bit colour, because some guys somewhere need to visualise petabytes of CFD data from outdated software, across the continent.
If those "clueless nitwit" developers had any sense, they'd volunteer their time maintaining these shitty old tools, just for those guys.
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.
Yes.
But you don't have to jump. Whoever creates your distribution will jump in your stead.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
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?
No distro I use will do that.
If the underlying toolkits the apps are built on will work with either Wayland or X without a re-compile, that would be somewhat acceptable but a bit bloated.
Interesting (not). I disagree with GP on many things, most having to do with VNC as I've used (Tight)VNC for many purposes and have achieved nearly same level of usability over 256K line as I have locally (not for any kind of animated/video context like games, video, etc. but for browsing web for articles, email, coding, etc.) but I also use X forwarding for several reasons and all I can see in your post is a counter argument that isn't and never has been a thing. It's just foul mannered nothing not worth the time I wasted on replying and I'm currently ass-whipping myself for it.
In capitalist USA corporations control the government.