Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 45

Thread: Will Wayland Become A New Desktop Standard?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,686

    Default Will Wayland Become A New Desktop Standard?

    Phoronix: Will Wayland Become A New Desktop Standard?

    As mentioned earlier on Phoronix, LinuxTag 2011 took place this past weekend in Berlin. One of the few talks I was able to make due to the Ubuntu Developer Summit in Budapest colliding with the event was the Wayland talk by SUSE's Egbert Eich. The focus of this talk was whether Wayland is on the way to becoming a new desktop standard.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16004

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    *ugh!* Where can I find the ODP file? >.<

  3. #3

    Default

    X definitely needs some work as far as compositing goes, but mend it, don't end it please!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thefirstm View Post
    X definitely needs some work as far as compositing goes, but mend it, don't end it please!
    Well slide 16 shows id doesn't have to, the only real addition is that you can have Wayland clients in direct communication with the compositor.

    I wouldn't mind betting that the big distros will be shipping X for many many years to come on their default install. Just increasingly using a Wayland compositor instead of the ones we have now.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    495

    Default

    The EGL and compositing sounds something that should be done in the Linux Kernel itself to be most efficient and integrated. Some kind of Linux EGL + OpenWF for compositing would greatly enhance compatibility and stability of applications.

    Same for opengl (+es). The Linux Kernel should have a official reference software library (+version) for that API. Windows has that. Now mesa is an unofficial software implementation.

    The LSB should ask for some improvements on the graphics side through use of EGL+OpenWF.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,766

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by plonoma View Post
    The EGL and compositing sounds something that should be done in the Linux Kernel itself to be most efficient and integrated. Some kind of Linux EGL + OpenWF for compositing would greatly enhance compatibility and stability of applications.

    Same for opengl (+es). The Linux Kernel should have a official reference software library (+version) for that API. Windows has that. Now mesa is an unofficial software implementation.

    The LSB should ask for some improvements on the graphics side through use of EGL+OpenWF.
    Benjamin Franzke is working afaik in implementing OpenWF over KMS (or something like that - he explained in a message here in the forum)


    What puzzles me is why the people in graphics haven't already put X in bugfix only mode and dedicate resources in developing wayland.

    Even if the only benefit of wayland was a "cleaner" codebase the benefits would be big. Plus it seems that more people (from companies=read potential money for devs) seem to be interested in wayland.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    I've simply opened them all in tabs. Care for Phoronix bandwith I guess?

    But it seems as if this will happen (if we put on the devil's Netcraft costume);
    1. X will shrink to merely a protocol with nothing else left in it;
    2. Wayland will run on top of what has been replacing X's (software) functionality;
    3. X is a simple protocol will run on top of Wayland.

    So basically they will be totaly and completely bundled.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    55

    Default

    I wonder, can DBUS be used for Wayland instead of a custom socket protocol?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thefirstm View Post
    X definitely needs some work as far as compositing goes, but mend it, don't end it please!
    Personally I don't mind if they replace X when Wayland has become stable enough for daily use.
    X is 26 years old ('84), I'm sure the code base is a complete mess now of old code that's kept around purely for compatibility with ancient programs that virtually nobody uses any more on a recent desktop and code that's meant to add support for new graphic card features, window management, etc.

    If Linux wants to go further on desktops then I don't think we can afford to keep this dinosaur around.
    It served its purpose well for many years, but now it's just preventing us from going further.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Columbus, OH, USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    "Each Wayland Server implementation can provide its own distinct set of interfaces..." This is a joke, right? We're doomed.

    Despite (or perhaps because) all of the raving, I remain sceptical. Oh, and adding another layer of indirection seems like a stupid idea. Really, what ever happened to Wayland being a set of experiments to test things that could be implemented in X.org or whatever the wording was?

    I think far too many people are just going off the cuff about "ancient" code as if it's necessarily bad and new things are necessarily good.

    PS: Remember that X.org is an implementation of the X11 protocol. "X" is ambiguous (or a robot).

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •