Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wayland 1.7.0 Marks an Important Release

Posted by Soulskill on from the onward-and-upward dept.

jones_supa writes: The 1.7.0 release of Wayland is now available for download. The project thanks all who have contributed, and especially the desktop environments and client applications that now converse using Wayland. In an official announcement from Bryce Harrington of Samsung, he says the Wayland protocol may be considered 'done' but that doesn't mean there's not work to be done. A bigger importance is now given to testing, documentation, and bugfixing. As Wayland is maturing, we are also getting closer to the point where the big Linux distros will eventually start integrating it to their operating system.

108 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Great, when will I use it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I keep hearing about Wayland release this, and Wayland release that. That's all great - keep releasing new versions, that's progress. But I want to know, when can I install a GNU/Linux distro and start using Wayland. I know, it's next year, but we'll said that for a couple of years now and I'm running out of patience.

    1. Re:Great, when will I use it? by afgam28 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can use Wayland in Fedora today: http://fedoramagazine.org/gnom...

    2. Re: Great, when will I use it? by jordonwii · · Score: 1

      Neither - it's based on Red Hat.

    3. Re: Great, when will I use it? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Redhat is based on Fedora. CentOS is as well - while CentOS base is the same as Redhat, they also take other Fedora features, such as Xen, when it's useful.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re: Great, when will I use it? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      One may well think of the relationship between RHEL and Fedora as similar to the one between Ubuntu and Debian.

      Fedora is as close to bleeding edge as you can get without going rolling release, and a major testbed for what RH will put into RHEL down the road.

      Also means that if you can get your project to become part of the Fedora install set you have pretty much made it...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    5. Re: Great, when will I use it? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Nope. Fedora is based on Red Hat. RHEL is another operating system also based on Red Hat. CentOS is based on RHEL, so it's a descendant of Red Hat but not of Fedora.

      Nope. Red Hat used to be a linux distribution, but now it's a company. Fedora is where features are tested before they get into RHEL, and CentOS is based on RHEL. But Red Hat Linux isn't a thing any more.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Documentation by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2

    Second is the protocol
    documentation, which is mechanically generated from the protocol
    definitions and works more like a reference manual. Third is the code
    documentation, which is also mechanically generated but from the library
    source code itself.

    That's the right way to do it. They use pelican, xmlto with some customized XSLT and graphviz for maintainable high-level diagrams.

    Pretty cool. So far I have only used sphinx (and doxygen before), but these days there are a lot of great documentation options out there.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  3. Re:So fast? Wow! by kthreadd · · Score: 2

    You can already run GNOME on Wayland on Fedora 21. I don't know when they will switch to it by default, but last time I heard anything about it the target was at Fedora 22.

  4. Remoting status using Wayland? by caseih · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After it was announced a year or two ago, I have heard nothing about RDP support in Wayland. Is it getting to the point that Wayland will have first-class support for transparently remoting apps with RDP? Anyone know the status on this? There's precious little info about this on the interwebs, and no real information on what the workflow looks like, say with ssh forwarding.

    1. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remoting should be done at the toolkit level. This is where it belong. Similarly to sftp, gtkclient->ssh->intertubes->ssh->gtkapp

      in practice you would call "gtkclient user@host:/path/to/gtk/application" which would connect the ssh pipes, set envar GTK_BACKEND to "pipe" and run the app. Gtk api get serialized both way, piped through ssh and run locally on your gtkclient which use what ever display backend your desktop is set to. This way you get the absolute minimal network traffics with zero lag in display. eg; highlight and scroll are just like local application.

      I am unqualified to make this a reality so no amount of 'it open source, do it yourself' is going to help. I am just complaining here because I can. Thanks for your time.

    2. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That's just priceless. We've gone from completely ignoring the fact that RDP has taken the world by storm in the last 20 years to really stupid alternate approaches.

      You could't create more Unix fragmentation if that's what you were actually trying for.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear, are you asking about Microsoft's Remote Desktop Protocol working with Wayland?

      Well it's originally based on an ITU-T recommendation, there are open source client implementations for most of it so yes. And from what I gather it's supposed to work but I haven't tried it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Biggest issue here: Wayland -itself- has _NO_ support for network/RDP. Its merely a protocol between applications.

      And there is the issue: GNOME/KDE (cant say for Enlightenment) are basically repurposing their X11 stuff. As you know the Xserver was network transparent, so neither GNOME/KDE has any capabilities to piggyback on. So I assume the answer here is "no time soon".

      As for Weston, I have not tested it, but Weston does include RDP support from what I can tell.

    5. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Wayland is how you display images, what happens on the backend is entirely the responsibility of something else. RDP is simple as making a "producer" that interfaces with Wayland.

    6. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Mathieu+Lu · · Score: 1

      We've moved from displaying remote applications from the xlib level over ssh, to the toolkit level over ssh (as parent described). It's Unix moving forward, finally.

      Microsoft's proprietary RDP protocol or alternatives such as VNC work differently (and usually pretty slow, since they work similarly to xlib, passing compressed bitmap images over the wire). If you want a remote desktop and your network link is fast enough, that's fine, but for most cases, toolkit-over-ssh is more secure and efficient.

    7. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by sjames · · Score: 1

      In practice, RDP can be a security risk. It can be mitigated, but hasn't been in practice.

    8. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's proprietary RDP protocol or alternatives such as VNC work differently (and usually pretty slow, since they work similarly to xlib, passing compressed bitmap images over the wire).

      What you say only applies to VNC. RDP only passes bitmaps when it needs to draw bitmaps. The protocol sends rendering primitives to a thin client, much like X. It can even send fonts or a video/audio stream to let the client do the rendering or decoding.

      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

    9. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by adolf · · Score: 1

      In practice, RDP can be a security risk. It can be mitigated, but hasn't been in practice.

      Is this security risk any different than any other method which allows relatively-insecure* remote logins to a general-purpose computer?

      For a long time, I had the default RDP port forwarded to my Windows 7 desktop computer at home -- open for all manner of fuckery -- out of sheer laziness on my part. Nothing bad happened, even though it was simply a username/password combo (and both the username and the password were relatively common English words) to gain access.

      *: No two-factor, no cryptographic authentication, no....

      --
      Kid-proof tablet..
    10. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by sjames · · Score: 2

      Yes, it presents hazards never even dreamed of by X or VNC.

      In one case I know of (no, I am bound to not name names here), RDP was a vector for a CryptoLocker attack. A reasonably secure operation (AV on email, IDS, strong user training, etc) granted an outside support person a temporary RDP connection to diagnose a problem. It seems the support person opened a bad email on his own machine while connected and CryptoLocker took advantage of the RDP forwarded file shares to encrypt the fileserver.

      OOOPS

    11. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      After it was announced a year or two ago.

      It wasn't "announced" as such. Wayland developers have always said that on the protocol level Wayland does not support remote applications. They cited many reasons why adding this support to the Wayland protocol itself would be bad and defeat the purpose of Wayland which was to reduce the complexity of that part of the graphic subsystem, and why remote support was one of the single biggest bottlenecks of X11.

      They then proceeded to say that there is nothing in Wayland preventing someone from adding remote support on the Wayland client where they believe this feature belongs, and proceeded to demonstrate Weston running with both VNC and RDP compatible remote applications. That's where it ended. They effectively said: "Here it works, see, now go forth and develop it if you want it, we're going back to focus on more important things like finishing Wayland."

    12. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by caseih · · Score: 1

      Ahh interesting. Makes sense, but I disagree about that being the right way to do it. The way you describe is hackish, having to run a client. We need the ability to simply remote log into a machine and run the binary and have it work. This is disappointing, if this is indeed the way they've chosen to go. Shouldn't matter what widget set an app uses; it should work (by some definition of the word "work") whether locally, or on a remote machine.

    13. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by dbIII · · Score: 2

      Developers plural? Repeatedly? I think you'll find it was Daniel Stone speaking about the newer stuff in gnome - not "a dozen years" but three and only one desktop.
      Avoid the gnome3 stuff and network transparency works as required even on slow connections.

    14. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Correct, but just to make things clear, there is an RDP backend in Wayland. There is a Slashdot announcement from 2013.

      However it's been a bit of a mystery to people if that code actually is in usable state and how it is operated.

    15. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      There was an RDP backend on top of Weston. There's a big difference. Wayland as a protocol does not have any concept of network rendering. They said it themselves on their docs, any remoting abilities need to be written as a separate piece such as a server sitting on top of the compositor, or handled entirely on the client side.

      They demonstrated the former using Weston, but it has nothing to do with the Wayland protocol.

    16. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by hitmark · · Score: 2

      The major think breaking said transparency was that everyone and their dog wanted to use OGL for something, and bypassing X by talking straight to the hardware and dumping the result as a bitmap into X again.

      This approach is by its very nature not network transparent, as it assumes that the program code lives on the same machine as the hardware used to draw the result.

      there are implementations for doing this over the network, but nobody seemed interested in adopting it.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    17. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Yes, it presents hazards never even dreamed of by X or VNC.

      X has always been a breathtaking hazard for reasons entirely the fault of X.

      In one case I know of (no, I am bound to not name names here), RDP was a vector for a CryptoLocker attack. A reasonably secure operation (AV on email, IDS, strong user training, etc) granted an outside support person a

      AV and IDS are worthless against targeted attacks.

      temporary RDP connection to diagnose a problem. It seems the support person opened a bad email on his own machine while connected and CryptoLocker took advantage of the RDP forwarded file shares to encrypt the fileserver.

      You can do the same with SSH.

    18. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by PPH · · Score: 2, Interesting

      gtkclient->ssh->intertubes->ssh->gtkapp

      Which means that I have to install/maintain a gtkapp on ever desktop that needs to access gtkclient. No thanks. In a corporate environment, that could be thousands of desktops.

      This is the sort of architecture that only Microsoft could love, with per-seat licenses for each user.

      With X, it is: Xclient->network->Xserver

      And Xserver is available on numerous OSs, so there's no desktop lockin.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    19. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Did you invent RDP or something? You'll break your back bending that far backwards to absolve it of the incident I wrote about.

      The attack wasn't targeted, it was a shotgun style spam opened at a bad moment.

      You CAN do that with ssh but it's far from the default setting.

    20. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Did you invent RDP or something? You'll break your back bending that far backwards to absolve it of the incident I wrote about.

      I fail to understand how the repercussions of social engineering attacks are the fault of a remote access technology unrelated to initial compromise.

      Especially given root cause from your story seems to be acceptance followed by execution of unauthenticated, untrusted messages.

      You CAN do that with ssh but it's far from the default setting.

      Name a popular Linux distro which fails to enable ssh, port redirect and scp by default. I dare you to name one.

      suse, debian, ubuntu, fedora, centos all DEFAULT setting. Every unix system I've ever used or connected to in the past decade offers port redirect and file system access via ssh.

    21. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Wow, you are desperately working to miss it!

      The file sharing that allowed the nasty on the remote terminal to get at the fileserver was not required and was not part of the reason for allowing that RDP connection. But it was there because RDP in the wild overshares by default.

      SSH and X don't tend to overshare by default. You can do port redirection, but only by explicitly asking for it.

    22. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Wow, you are desperately working to miss it!

      Right back at ya.

      The file sharing that allowed the nasty on the remote terminal to get at the fileserver was not required and was not part of the reason for allowing that RDP connection. But it was there because RDP in the wild overshares by default.

      SSH and X don't tend to overshare by default. You can do port redirection, but only by explicitly asking for it.

      Can you explain the difference between a share allowed with an RDP connection and the use of SCP over SSH which is enabled and allowed by default?

      If you own the client and the client logs on to something it would seem to me this is game over you must assume everything the client has access was compromised unless you have reason to believe otherwise... as we already know SSH provides file system access by default to all clients. I'm failing to comprehend the difference.

    23. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by sjames · · Score: 1

      SCP moves one file. SSH doesn't move any. RDP makes every file the target has access to directly accessible as a file share on the client even if you don't want it to.

      CryptoLocker running on the client wouldn't have seen the files the target could access at all had the connection been VNC, X, or ssh.

    24. Re:Remoting status using Wayland? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      SCP moves one file. SSH doesn't move any. RDP makes every file the target has access to directly accessible as a file share on the client even if you don't want it to.

      CryptoLocker running on the client wouldn't have seen the files the target could access at all had the connection been VNC, X, or ssh.

      So this is just a security by obscurity play. The assertion is since a particular instance of malware lacks a feature set enabling it to detect and subvert SSH connections from a compromised client then SSH is more secure than RDP even though both offer functionally equivalent access.

      Sounds like all the wrong lessons have been learned from this security breach.

      Also worth noting RDP maps the clients local resources to remote server not the other way around.

  5. Re:Linux distros by geantvert · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually, the opposite is happening. Lot's of BSD users are so annoyed by the anti-systemd trolls joining their community that their are now moving back to Linux.

  6. Re:Linux distros by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow. First post and you've already hijacked the thread into another systemd flame fest?

    --
    My first program:

    Hell Segmentation fault

  7. Re:So fast? Wow! by zdzichu · · Score: 1

    Fedora 22 (due in three months) target is to have login screen on Wayland. Fedora 23 (October?) should have fully working GNOME session on Wayland.

    --
    :wq
  8. try before you buy? by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

    Anyway to try it on hardware without using vm?

    1. Re:try before you buy? by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

      Do they do that for their bleeding edge, this may not work version?

  9. Re:So fast? Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    As Wayland is maturing, we are also getting closer to the point where the big Linux distros will eventually start integrating it to their operating system.

    Will I grow old and die before this event?

    They're targeting GNU HURD as their primary platform.

    It's supposed to be used to play the next Duke Nukem release.

  10. Re:Linux distros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    anti-systemd trolls

    Nice revisionist history. It's the systemd guys that have been acting like children and constantly attack Linux users for pointing-out bugs. After posting a reproduction script to the mailing list about a problem with systemd ignoring the exit status from a script, I was told by one of the main devs that he hoped my mother got cancer. Joke's on him. She died of cancer in 1977. You also have kids like http://slashdot.org/~Eunuchswear here that post some nasty replies, and it appears from looking at the moderation on the posts he is replying to that he or his friends have mod points and are using them to attack people that post about systemd problems.

    If the systemd guys spent as much time programming as they did attacking us, then we probably wouldn't have anything to complain about in the first place!

    Posting as AC because two of the last three times I posted one of the systemd punks moderated my posts down. I don't want to lose more karma to those trolls.

  11. Re:Linux distros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Has it been tested? No.
    Has it been audited? No.

    It listens to network ports so all it takes is a single vulnerability in systemd and you can exploit the entire machine.

  12. RDP not as good at seamless... by Junta · · Score: 1

    Compared to X11, RDP isn't good for seamless graphical element integration into the local environment (though integration of audio makes it better on another front, and performance wise RDP runs circles around X11).

    All that said, I'm not one to be down on Wayland. Xpra demonstrates how a linux graphical environment is best remoted, and it doesn't really use the X protocol at all for the business end of things. It interjects as a compositor and window manager, with a dummy X server to satisfy the demands of X clients. The compositor gets the graphical data, sound comes along, and intercepting window manager hints lets it do other things like correctly place 'tray' icons. In other words the X protocol is at this point thoroughly superseded for it's big strength. I don't know if Wayland has something like Xpra yet, but I have hope.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:RDP not as good at seamless... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I actually disagree with this, well if I interpreted it correctly.

      If you're saying that exporting an entire desktop isn't as good as exporting a single app then I agree with you. But the single app thing is actually supported by RDP.
      If you're saying that the app should seamlessly integrate into the user environment completely taking on the target environment's look and feel, then I disagree. I greatly prefer to know which if of my programs are part of the local environment and which are part of a remote sessions, and making them seamlessly integrate into the target UI blurs that line.

    2. Re:RDP not as good at seamless... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      But the single app thing is actually supported by RDP.

      People here keep saying that but none, possibly until now, of those have actually done it. How for instance can I launch an application window on a Win7 box with RDP fully licenced for one user onto the Win7 box next to it instead of an entire desktop? Let's assume I don't care what happens on the screen of the box that actually has the application to make things easier. Any ideas?
      Trivial in X in 1995 but this feature in RDP doesn't seem to be putting in an appearance in the wild.

    3. Re:RDP not as good at seamless... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Well you need a service that implements that part of the RDP spec of course. Windows 7 doesn't. Windows Terminal Services on servers have always had that capability when using Windows clients, though it seems to require a bit of hoohaaa to setup.

      Windows server 2008 onwards supports RemoteApp which is apparently an easy implementation of the same thing though I've never seen it in practice.

      A quick google search also shows a product called SeamlessRDP which seems to be compatible with Windows RDP clients, though not as a windows server??? not sure about that one. I may give that a go on my linux box sometime, it looks interesting.

      The problem is more use case issues. Microsoft like to be tight on functionality if you don't buy a server product, and there appear to be several options for linux coming up on Google.

    4. Re:RDP not as good at seamless... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Thanks - all I've got till now is "but RDP does single apps so X is obsolete" and then silence when I ask for an example.
      I'll take a look at SeamlessRDP - which may scratch the itch of a couple of users wanting an old version of AutoCAD LT that runs under Wine but not under any 64 bit MS Windows. Yes there's Virtualbox, VNC etc but they want their single window. Yes there's X on MS Windows but the menus misbehave.
      I looked at MS Server 2008 but then I found that the 200 page windows licencing for dummies book was not a prop mocked up for a joke at MS but a real thing reflecting how convoluted it is - not the sort of thing to reduce hot seating, most things provide network licences or dongles cheap enough that there's no point having a high spec MS Windows machine with people on ordinary desktops remoting into it. High spec desktop machines for everyone is cheaper up to double digits.

  13. The release of Some Software is now available by syzler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    <rant>

    For those of us who have not heard of Wayland, the following is how the summary reads:

    The x.y.z release of Some Software is now available for download. The project thanks all who have contributed, and especially the desktop environments and client applications that now converse using Some Software. In an official announcement from Some Author of Some Company, he says the Some Software protocol may be considered 'done' but that doesn't mean there's not work to be done. A bigger importance is now given to testing, documentation, and bugfixing. As Some Software is maturing, we are also getting closer to the point where the big Linux distros will eventually start integrating it to their operating system.

    So what does Some Software actually do and why should I be interested? I know that I can Google Some Software, but is it really that hard to start with the summary with the following:

    The x.y.z release of Somesoftware, a package which does blah blah blah, is now available for download. ...

    After all, phrases such as "As Wayland is maturing", imply that this is a relatively new piece of software still under development of which everyone is not familiar, especially for those of us using BSDs, Solaris, and Slackware.

    </rant>

    1. Re:The release of Some Software is now available by syzler · · Score: 1, Informative

      BTW, for those not familiar and who have not yet googled it, according to Wikipedia, Wayland aims to be a replacement for the X Window System.

    2. Re:The release of Some Software is now available by thegarbz · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Welcome back. I noticed you have a relatively low UID and are one of the long history of slashdot users to return from your 10 year walk in the jungle. Much has changed on Slashdot and unfortunately it's not the same as it used to be. Here's a summary list of changes:

      - Slashdot is now Dice's personal blog. We do videos and they ignore all complaints which happen weekly.
      - Slashdot attempted to roll out Beta which was hated universally by all and spawned a couple of Slashdot forks.
      - Bitcoin (a virtual currency) turned out to be every bit the crap that people said it was despite Dice's advertising attempts with daily articles.
      - Pottering is forking GNU/Linux into a systemd/Linux. This is still unfolding but you can keep up to date with the daily articles explaining just how many users are abandoning linux as a result.
      - Wayland was created. Slashdot ran weekly articles about it for over a year because the uneducated arguments about how it works provided lots of lolz.

      We hope you enjoy your stay. It's good to have you with us, even if it's just for the day.

  14. Re:Software "done", by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Software "done", but neither tested nor documented yet. So, what do we have then? Shipped 1.7.0 because it compiled?

    Protocol done, nobody said the implementation was done except you so crawl back under the bridge.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  15. Re:Is RDP really the answer? by itzly · · Score: 1

    Why would you send bitmaps over the line when the only thing that matters is the rendering and state of standardized widgets?

    Because sending a bitmap Just Works. A bitmap is a bitmap, and 10 years from now, will still be a bitmap. Rendering and standardized widgets change all the time.

  16. Re:So fast? Wow! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    GNOME? does anyone even run that shit after the GNOME team ruined it?

  17. Re:Great, when I can use it? by Junta · · Score: 2

    FYI you may want to try xpra (not wayland, but still). It's better than X forwarding, but operates on principles that translate to the Wayland stack if you dig into it.

    Besides, I know portions of NCAR use VirtualGL (at least last I was involved). It does some stuff Xpra doesn't and currently only works with an X stack, but again it operates on principles that don't really intrinsically use the X11 network features.

    Of course you may simply be referring to the fact that such approaches has not yet evolved in Wayland ecosystem, rather than implying they are hampered by not having an X11 style approach to remote applications.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  18. Re:Linux distros by Barsteward · · Score: 2

    " I was told by one of the main devs that he hoped my mother got cancer" - how about naming names???

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  19. Re:Linux distros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    fuck you...I guess your kind would rather whine

    Yeah, that's really productive.

    I bet Red Hat is regretting associating themselves with systemd by hiring its creator and main developer. I know when I call their support that they're fed-up with dealing with systemd-created problems.

  20. Re:Linux distros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > She died of cancer in 1977.

    Which means you're old enough to know better than to engage with angry, irrational children. Next time just ignore them rather than arguing with them. They obviously think that those of us that care about a script's exit status, stedrr not being logged in the journal, or high priority syslog messages being dropped are just old and out of touch. You're obviously not going to convince them with facts and logic after they're so emotionally (well, anger anyway) invested in defending their pet project.

  21. Re:So fast? Wow! by kthreadd · · Score: 1

    Quite a lot of people use GNOME. The 3.0-3.6 versions were a bit shaky, but starting with 3.8 I would say that it's been quite good again.

  22. Re:So fast? Wow! by kthreadd · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, login screen in F22 and default in F23. Thanks!

  23. Re:Linux distros by greenwow · · Score: 4, Informative

    > moderated my posts down.

    I think three of my last four systemd posts were marked as trolls even though I gave specific examples of bugs. The systemd community is simply toxic.

    Last night, I created a bug at:

    https://bugs.freedesktop.org/e...

    With a script I found from:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/...

    that I was able to use to reproduce two different systemd bugs with on a Red Hat 7 and a CentOS 7 system. It is a well written and very self-explanatory example. I can no longer find the bug. It looks like they deleted it.

  24. Re:So fast? Wow! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    I really don't know anyone that uses it. Mate, Cinnamin, KDE, xfce4....but no GNOME users.

    I've Debian 8 testing with default desktop in a vm....GNOME still awful for me. Won't even talk about systemD troubleshooting which was the purpose of making that vm

  25. Re:Linux distros by Skarjak · · Score: 1

    Considering the overwhelming amount of hate systemd gets in every linux thread, it seems strange to accuse the systemd folks of trolling. The venom is clearly not coming from them, at least not the majority of it.

  26. Re:Linux distros by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2

    This is fun -- a troll is pretending to be me.

    It was me that made the [incorrect] suggestion about Type=forking.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  27. Re:Linux distros by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    What was the bug#

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  28. Re:Linux distros by Etzos · · Score: 2

    Yeah. I have to agree with this to a degree. There are a great number of childish and petty people in BOTH camps. I've seen good anti-systemd posts get modded troll and I've seen good pro-systemd posts get modded troll. To attack the project community (or anti-project) community based on the toxic fringes of each seems counterintuitive.

    (Disclaimer: I'm from the pro-systemd camp, and while I've tried to keep my posts as nice as possible I'm sure I've slipped from time to time. For that, I'm sorry.)

  29. Re:Linux distros by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    One of the huge problems I have is that when others try the examples given they find:

    systemd does log high priority messages
    systemd does not ignore stderr
    systemd does not ignore exit codes.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  30. Re: Linux distros by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    the number.

    what was the bug number.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  31. Re:Is RDP really the answer? by canistel · · Score: 2

    Because it's fast. I don't care what any linux user says (and I'm 100% linux on my own stuff at home), RDP is still 10 times quicker than anything linux has to offer in this area. I do like the desktop integration of remoting through SSH, but it's dog slow. Seems to me there ought to be a way to run RDP type stuff remotely and still have each app appear in it's own window and be managed by the desktop.

  32. Re:Great, when I can use it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Indeed the horror. I recently bought a new car, but when I wanted to put my horse in front of my brand new car I noticed there were no shafts! How the hell can I let my horse pull my car when I run out of gas when I'm in the middle of a wilderness with no gas station in sight?

    Sigh... I had to return my car. I guess I've to wait until some bright mind comes up with the idea of designing a fosil fuel independent car with a couple of shafts.

  33. Real engineers write specs and docs by radarskiy · · Score: 2

    So a) they got to v1.7.0 of an implementation before they finished the initial protocol they were implementing, and b) they are NOW increasing their work on documentation and testing.

    This is why actual engineers, including software engineers, either laugh or cry over these programmers who think they should be treated with respect.

  34. Re:Linux distros by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    The venom is clearly not coming from them, at least not the majority of it.

    Well, I guess venom is an inadequate description for systemd...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  35. Re:Is RDP really the answer? by Barefoot+Monkey · · Score: 1

    RDP is still 10 times quicker than anything linux has to offer in this area

    Except for RDP, of course. Linux offers RDP, and this protocol is obviously not 10 times quicker than itself ;)

    Pardon my pedantic attempt at levity. I haven't actually used RDP in Linux for ages, so I don't know how current implementations compare to those used in modern Windows, but I glanced on Wikipedia and found something you might find interesting: "In 2009, rdesktop was forked as FreeRDP, a new project aiming at modularizing the code, addressing various issues, and implementing new features. FreeRDP comes with its own command-line-client xfreerdp, which supports Seamless Windows in RDP6." Seamless windows is the thing you're looking for, so maybe give FreeRDP a try.

  36. To point out why there is a fuss about Wayland by dbIII · · Score: 2

    aims to be a replacement for the X Window System

    Only the bits of X they consider important.
    It was planned as more an alternative MS style window system for *nix boxes than a "replacement" for X, but has adopted more X style features (eg. choice of window management instead of one style fits all) as the project has progressed.

    It's the differences that have people arguing and putting people down for wanting to run applications from 2013, 2005 or (shock horror!) commercial *nix software that still has bits from 1999. If you are not willing to have all new applications for an all new environment then Wayland is not for you because it is an alternative desktop for new stuff and not designed to do what the old one could do and run old applications.

    1. Re:To point out why there is a fuss about Wayland by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      There is an X server you can run as a wayland client. Though popup menu's may be broken due to issues with how each application / framework calculates screen offsets, everything else works fine.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    2. Re:To point out why there is a fuss about Wayland by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Best i can tell, you can use Wayland as a display driver for Xorg (THE X server right now, iirc).

      Frankly that is the way i see myself using Wayland, as basically a way to render the whole X session using OGL. This instead of using X as a "minimal" container for a OGL "window".

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  37. Re:Linux distros by cmurf · · Score: 2

    You're confused. Bugzilla bugs endure forever, they don't get deleted. Even a developer doesn't have an option in the UI to delete a bug, they can only close it. I've filed bunches of systemd bugs. They've always been professionally responded to, and many of those bugs were in fact considered bugs and have been fixed. The rest either were user error, dracut, udev or kernel bugs.

  38. Re:Linux distros by Microlith · · Score: 1

    It's the systemd guys that have been acting like children and constantly attack Linux users for pointing-out bugs.And it's been hostile reactionaries that have made death threats and spout technically and factually incorrect things about systemd.

    After posting a reproduction script to the mailing list about a problem with systemd ignoring the exit status from a script, I was told by one of the main devs that he hoped my mother got cancer.

    The systemd mailing list is public, right? Cause you could totally be making shit up right now...

    You also have kids like http://slashdot.org/~Eunuchswe... here that post some nasty replies, and it appears from looking at the moderation on the posts he is replying to that he or his friends have mod points and are using them to attack people that post about systemd problems.

    IT'S A CONSPIRACY!

  39. Re:Is RDP really the answer? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Yeah if you're remoting on a LAN. Those of us who remote access our linux boxes online crave something faster.

    It's quite telling when users of a display system that was built around network transparency opt to instead install programs that offer alternatives like Xrdp.

  40. dafuq is wayland by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    I hit /. daily, fark daily, run Linux daily. I've heard of Wayland, but have no idea what it is. So, um, WTF is Wayland and why should I care? Summary, help me out?

    1. Re:dafuq is wayland by hitmark · · Score: 2

      low level GUI plumbing. It is X without the networking stuff, and assumes you have a GPU to play around with.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    2. Re:dafuq is wayland by rdnetto · · Score: 1

      Wayland is a replacement for the X window server. (X is the software the sits between your graphics drivers and your desktop environment.) X is ancient at this point and has fundamental issues with its design that mean security issues which can't be fixed without breaking backward compatibility. X has a lot of features that it is required to support to maintain backward compatibility that no one uses any more - modern systems work by just pushing blocks of pixels to it. Wayland only supports this method of operation, so it's much simpler than X. Wayland's main developers are ex-X developers who are intimately familiar with the problem's X has (see Daniel Stone's talk on youtube for more info).

      Wayland has been somewhat controversial because it does not have support for network transparency, unlike X. However, most modern apps don't use X in a network transparent way, and X network transparency is actually slower than VNC. The Wayland developers have advocated an approach similar to VNC for network transparency, but AFAIK there's no major implementation of it yet, so it remains controversial (even though almost no one is actually using it right now).

      --
      Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  41. Re:Linux distros by Microlith · · Score: 1, Troll

    I'll be amazed if the GP does. Not because he chooses to take the high road, but because he's spouting BS.

  42. Re:Linux distros by tck42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    FWIW the reddit you link to has some replies with very reasonable explanations for the behavior you mention. As they state, I think the deal is even if it fails, it failed _after_ it started, and thus the start itself was successful. I think this is reasonable. I also got all log entries when reproducing here (same result as everyone else in that thread).

    I'm not saying deleting bugs is cool - at least a WONTFIX or link to a DUP is appropriate - but are you sure it was opened successfully? What was the bug #?

    The above said - I do see your point from a usability, if not strict "proper functioning" standpoint; previously for forking services that did some sort of constant time initialization and checking (opening files, sockets, etc) if the initialization failed they could report back and the startup script could return that result - systemd doesn't seem to support that. However there are other problems with the old way too (as you're checking result code I assume you're scripting) - startup could hang and you never get a result.I suppose the solution is similar for both cases - pick a point of time in the future and check if the status is as expected.

    Maybe this is a feature request? As stated in the reddit, it only makes sense for forking services. It's not something I'd ever want, but maybe you could give a use case?

    --
    SIGDANGER is my middle name
  43. Re:STOP FUCKING WITH X11 by tck42 · · Score: 1

    You should watch this. The drivers behind this are not just gamers and idiot home users.

    --
    SIGDANGER is my middle name
  44. Back to basics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't know what a compositor does - can someone give a link to an explanation how all this stuff fits together please, preferably one with diagrams?

    As someone who would like to use Linux exclusively and would like to promote it more, I'm annoyed and embarrassed that I can't get decent Linux remote desktop over my GB LAN: You want video? What year do you think this is, 2015?
    Whereas Microsoft RDP works very well indeed.

    1. Re:Back to basics by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Compositor is the "image mixer" which draws the final framebuffer by composing together the application framebuffers.

      There is an RDP backend in Wayland already, but there seems to be some confusion about how to use it.

  45. Re:Linux distros by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

    I find it entertaining that people even post drivel like this. Why is it that the hate and venom must not be justified? Why not judge software on its merits, situations on the facts? I don't give a rat's backside who spews more venom; I care if the software works and if they actually fix problems or not.

    Its equally possible that the systemd people are wonderful and being hated on by idiots as that they're all jerks being hated on by righteous geniuses. You shouldn't pick sides based on who's yelling.

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  46. Re:So fast? Wow! by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

    I use gnome on one PC because I want to know for sure when I post how bad it sucks that I'm right. Fedora 20 for the record; and Gnome 3 manages to crash on me multiple times an hour some days doing nothing exciting (and with 16GB of RAM).

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  47. comprised of? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

    From TFA:
    >Wayland's developer documentation is comprised of three different pieces.

    Where's that guy from Wikipedia to fix their grammar?

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  48. Re:This bridge is for sale, actually. Low price! by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    The open development process would be impossible if the code was not released early on. This is not just some Red Hat's or Samsung's internal project which is shipped only after it is fully polished inside the house.

    Of course, if it in the coming months or years never attains the state where you can expect it to compile properly or to have complete documentation, then some whining would be understandable. So you have a point.

  49. Re:Linux distros by hitmark · · Score: 1, Informative

    Actually that bug may already be fixed upstream, and the proper place to report it is to RH bugtracker.

    Basically, RH has used a "old" systemd version for RHEL7.

    Sadly these kinds of issues muddy the water regarding systemd critique, as it allows blanket dismissal of complaints...

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  50. Re:Linux distros by hitmark · · Score: 1

    It seems to boil down to this behavior having changed, for the better, with more recent systemd versions. But RHEL is using a "old" version.

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  51. Re:Linux distros by hitmark · · Score: 1

    Sadly i think that after Poettering went live with his rant about the Linux community, the whole systemd issue has turned into a "gamergate" style shit storm.

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  52. Re:Is RDP really the answer? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    RDP is actually usable over bad ADSL connections. With real, modern programs. X is barely usable over such a connection unless you're using a Motiff app from 20 years ago.

  53. Re:STOP FUCKING WITH X11 by hitmark · · Score: 1

    Watching that is just as likely to drive people away, as the attitude of the presenter is up there with the one displayed by the systemd maintainers...

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  54. Re:Linux distros by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    Which version of RHEL? I've tried all the things that are supposed to be a problem on CentOS 7, and they all work without a problem.

    I've searched for bug reports or mailing list messages about these problema and can't find any.

    The whole "systemd throws away log messages" idea is endlessly repeated by AC's who never reply to honest questions and http://slashdot.org/~greenwow who is some kind of insane troll (check his comment history if you don't beieve me)..

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  55. Re:Linux distros by paulatz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The debate is not exactly symmetric: One side has built a certain software that has been adopted by all mayor linux distributions. The other side has built nothing but flamewars.

    --
    this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
  56. Re:STOP FUCKING WITH X11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You should watch this. The drivers behind this are not just gamers and idiot home users.

    Replacing X11 is of little advantage to gamers, because game performance is almost entirely determined by OpenGL, and the drawing operations bypass any X protocols. (gl)X is only needed for purposes like creating a - usually fullscreen - window and GL context, swapping buffers at the end of each frame, and handling keyboard and mose input. Saving a few microseconds on those does not make a noteworthy difference. A decent window manager also automatically disables composition, which does have a negative impact on performance, when a fullscreen application like a game is running. In practice, with drivers of reasonable quality (currently available for Nvidia hardware), OpenGL games and demos run as fast or even slightly better than on Windows. Also, Phoronix benchmarks have shown that using Wayland can actually make the performance worse.

    Linux ports of games run worse than Windows/Direct3D not because of the alleged "overhead" of X11, but as a result of poor driver and port quality. OpenGL and Linux have very small market share in gaming, so hardware vendors and game developers cannot justify spending much resources on optimizing drivers/software for those.

    Some of the other improvements over X11, such as allowing for displays larger than 32768x32768 pixels, are also of limited practical relevance for the forseeable future, other than for some specialized niche applications. Not to mention the limitation could be removed by updating X11. In any case, it took more than a decade for the standard desktop resolution to increase from 640x480 to 1920x1080, and above 10000 pixels the human eye starts to become a limiting factor at a sensible vieving distance/FOV.

  57. Re:Linux distros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I know nearly squat about systemd, but after reading these scripts, it looks like desired behavior to me. I don't want one program returning the exit status of another program as it's own exit status. If that were permitted, it would be impossible to see if the program launching a service failed from if the service failed to launch.

    I can see where novice scripter or people familiar with the blocking style of SystemV might write it this way. It's just not the right thing to do when considering concurrency.

    After all, exactly how long does one have to wait until a service exits before looking for the exit code? This is not a script running service, so you can't get a passing exit code in any reasonable amount of time.

  58. Re:Linux distros by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    that was my thought

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  59. Is Wayland dependent on Systemd? by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

    If so, why?

  60. Re:So fast? Wow! by fidelleon · · Score: 1

    Will it run Crysis?

  61. Re:Linux distros by macpacheco · · Score: 1

    I'm a long time UNIX guy, started way back in 1988. So far I like systemd. Have been using it on OpenSuSE.
    Can't see what is the fuzz all about.
    There are plenty of non systemd linuxes anyways.
    I particularly love the systemd logging system.

  62. Re:Linux distros by Skarjak · · Score: 1

    That's a cute rant, but you'll note that my post makes no judgement on the software. I was really commenting on someone else's statement on systemd trolls. Did you also inform the person above that what they post is drivel?

    Let's be honest, there's a huge anti-systemd circlejerk on slashdot, and very few people are actually using logical arguments to justify their hate. Given that all the major distros have adopted it, it's clear as day that the reaction against systemd is a mostly emotional one.

  63. Re:STOP FUCKING WITH X11 by tck42 · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure how - note that Daniel Stone (the presenter) appears here http://www.x.org/wiki/BoardOfD... - so he's one of the current folks in charge of dealing with the current xorg code; who better to judge the current state of xorg than someone who works with it every day? Another good presentation on the current state of X and its problems: http://youtu.be/2l7ixRE3OCw

    --
    SIGDANGER is my middle name
  64. Not even tried by mrmangosir559 · · Score: 1

    But wonder if the tricks Bumblebee employ, would work in Wayland.

  65. Re:STOP FUCKING WITH X11 by hitmark · · Score: 1

    Says that he resigned back in 2009.

    And hmm, Collabora. I keep bumping into that company for some reason...

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  66. Re:Linux distros by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

    That's an interestingly biased comparison.

    I can repeat it for you; one side (Microsoft) has built a certain software (Windows) which has been adopted by billions of people worldwide. The other side has nothing but flamewars.

    Its not true though, is it? Just because something is adopted doesn't mean its best, or even good -- it just means it was adopted at all. You see the fallacy now, right?

    Microsoft didn't release Windows 8 because they thought it sucked. Same for Vista, and Windows Me. They thought they were good; and Dell, HP, Acer, etc. installed them on PCs because that's what you do, not because they were *good* but because nothing else did what was necessary at the time.

    Systemd is *functional* but it has horrible problems, not the least of which is with PR and responding to bug reports which it simply denies are bugs or exist at all. Its in use because nothing else does what it does as well as it does it -- that doesn't mean it deserves praise.

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  67. Re:Linux distros by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

    That's a flood-length post? How much do you suck at typing exactly?

    Those 174 words took me no longer than 2 minutes to write; maybe you should do something more productive than troll.

    --
    - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)