Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Feb 2012 23:44 UTC
X11, Window Managers "Although current discussion of the Linux desktop tends to focus on the disharmony around Unity and the GNOME shell, the true revolution on the desktop is taking place out of sight of users. The Wayland display server is expected to reach version 1.0 later this year, and is seen by many as the long term replacement for the X Window System, with real potential to improve and transform the performance of the desktop for Linux users."
Thread beginning with comment 507030
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Wayland does not "replace" X
by Delgarde on Tue 14th Feb 2012 01:26 UTC in reply to "Wayland does not "replace" X"
Delgarde
Member since:
2008-08-19

From the FAQ: "X will always be there on the side."

X is effectively the remote desktop protocol for Linux. The only strangeness has been that Linux has used "remote desktop" on the local machine as well. Wayland basically gives an app direct access to the compositor.

I hope like hell that this is only implemented for games or other "special" applications, and that toolkits like GTK and QT add Wayland support for better performance. I'd hate to lose the ability to realistically use a linux desktop remotely.


From my own reading on Wayland, X isn't being kept for remoting - it's being kept for compatibility, since apps compiled for X aren't going to go away any time soon. Support for remoting is incidental to that.

For native Wayland apps, the hypothetical solution to remoting involves a custom compositor - the app has direct access to *a* compositor, but it's one that simply proxies everything across a network to the real one.

(Hypothetical because nobody has actually done it, but this is how the Wayland guys think remoting should be done - in the compositor, not in the rendering API where apps have to deal with it.)

Reply Parent Score: 11

tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"From the FAQ: "X will always be there on the side."

X is effectively the remote desktop protocol for Linux. The only strangeness has been that Linux has used "remote desktop" on the local machine as well. Wayland basically gives an app direct access to the compositor.

I hope like hell that this is only implemented for games or other "special" applications, and that toolkits like GTK and QT add Wayland support for better performance. I'd hate to lose the ability to realistically use a linux desktop remotely.


From my own reading on Wayland, X isn't being kept for remoting - it's being kept for compatibility, since apps compiled for X aren't going to go away any time soon. Support for remoting is incidental to that.

For native Wayland apps, the hypothetical solution to remoting involves a custom compositor - the app has direct access to *a* compositor, but it's one that simply proxies everything across a network to the real one.

(Hypothetical because nobody has actually done it, but this is how the Wayland guys think remoting should be done - in the compositor, not in the rendering API where apps have to deal with it.)
"

Great explanation, I wish someone will write a network-transparent compositor using Wayland.

So we can debunk the myth that "Wayland won't be able to do network transparency" and so that people can actually learn how Wayland works.

Edited 2012-02-14 03:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

So we can debunk the myth that "Wayland won't be able to do network transparency" and so that people can actually learn how Wayland works.


Good luck on that. The information is already there for anyone to read - that's why I'm able to comment on the subject, from having read what the developers have said on the mailing lists.

But the people who spread myths generally aren't the kind of people who are interested in spending time learning how things actually work - if they were, they'd have done it, and wouldn't be spreading myths. They read the the summary and comments on news sites, and don't bother following the links to get the details.

Reply Parent Score: 4

renox Member since:
2005-07-06

From my own reading on Wayland, X isn't being kept for remoting - it's being kept for compatibility

I have my doubts: the desktop projects (KDE, Gnome) which do a lot of maintenance of the toolkits are quite famous for their lack of compatibility.

So I wouldn't be surprised that soon they'll say, now we don't support anymore X, Wayland is better..

And IMHO noone has suggested a convincing remote mechanism for WAN access on Wayland (no rewrite everything in HTML isn't convincing, neither is send full buffers).

Reply Parent Score: 1

Gusar Member since:
2010-07-16

I have my doubts: the desktop projects (KDE, Gnome) which do a lot of maintenance of the toolkits are quite famous for their lack of compatibility.

So I wouldn't be surprised that soon they'll say, now we don't support anymore X, Wayland is better..

That's not what's meant here with "compatibility". What's meant here is legacy apps for which there is no current equivalent, but they still do their job fine. X will be there, working inside Wayland, so that you'll still be able to run such legacy apps.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

And IMHO noone has suggested a convincing remote mechanism for WAN access on Wayland (no rewrite everything in HTML isn't convincing, neither is send full buffers).

Why would you expect the client to send the full compositing buffer? It just has to send the damage regions (and probably it's clip list).

Reply Parent Score: 3