Wayland seems ready to me but the main problem that many programs are not configured / compiled to support it. Why is that? I know it’s not easy as “Wayland support? Yes” (but in many cases adding a flag is enough but maybe it’s not a perfect support). What am I missing? Even Blender says if it fails to use Wayland it will use X11.
When Wayland is detected, it is the preferred system, otherwise X11 will be used
Also XWayland has many limitations as X11 does.
Blender’s Wayland support is not great because they’re doing stuff from scratch. They’re not using an existing toolkit like GTK, Qt, Electron, or even something like SDL to get Wayland support.
But if you’re using an existing toolkit things are much easier and support is automatically there, you just need to do testing to ensure everything works.
The common biggest things that still use Xwayland are Chromium based apps and programs running under wine/proton. Chromium has an experimental Wayland mode that works well enough, but definitely has some bugs, especially around windowing. Wine Wayland is in the works.
Thanks for the insight.
Yeah Blender seems like an exception.
Also that means I play lots of Wine/Proton games and many web apps / Electron don’t care.
Wine and Proton have actually put a ton of work into Wayland support, it’s very far along. I wouldn’t be surprised for Proton to have a native Wayland version soon.
Some applications, such as those with tablet demands, are not met by current wayland des with proper tablet support and xwayland is currently the better option. This may have changed in the last year or so, but this is roughly my recollection of certain big art programs.
Xwayland doesn’t get input in some special way, it uses the exact same Wayland protocols to get input events as native Wayland apps. All claims about it being more complete or anything like that are nonsense.
Krita forces Xwayland because they have some X11 specific code they haven’t bothered porting away from, that’s all.
Also XWayland has many limitations as X11 does.
If an app has only ever supported X11, then it probably doesn’t care about those limitations (the apps that do care probably already have a Wayland version). And if an app doesn’t care about the extra stuff Wayland has to offer, then there’s not really a reason to add the extra support burden of Wayland. As long as they work fine in XWayland, I think a lot of apps won’t switch over until X11 support starts dropping from their toolkit, and they’ll just go straight to Wayland-only.
Yeah I agree. Maybe some day X11 will be seen as something legacy that needs to be deprecated. But not now…
Plasma deprecated their X11 session in v6 pending removal in the future, and Redhat has already dropped it in Fedora & will do for EL in the next release.
Plasma didn’t deprecate X11. Though some developers hinted that the Xorg session will probably be dropped before Plasma 7 and before Qt drops X11. But nothing concrete.
Wayland isn’t even adopted by every desktop environment yet. xfce, cinnamon, mate, lxqt, and all the ancient window managers all use x11, and all have their users.
If it works on xwayland, chances are it won’t be switched for a long time.
Because it’s so complicated that given a page (page and a half) to answer the simple question, “Why does Wayland support still give you more problems than solutions?” We had to describe it like the summary of a PHD theses in client server architecture?
Come on with that load of hot trash 😭
Do you want the short answer? The short answer is “Because there’s a lot of applications that do a lot of different things and getting a good design for a protocol that supports all of those things is a process that takes time”
With the headline, yeah… kinda :-) Your answer plus a bit of “this is why it’s important.” And I would have grunted and gone back under my bridge…
I’m feeling a bit sheepish about my comment on the other side of the day.
But I was also hoping for a lot more. Better desktop security… and that’s underselling it because my understanding is we’re pretty much coming from zero, so this was always going to be rough.
I have yet to run into an insurmountable issue, but I’ve just hopped distros rather than (successful) troubleshooting. Always makes me grumpy ;-)
If I understand correctly, Wayland does provide better desktop security. At least two of the common issues are tied directly back to that.
Screen sharing apps, which need to access what one or more other apps are showing, and screen readers for the deaf, which need to access what text other apps are displaying.
Wayland intentionally recuses itself of these problems. That’s understandable, as these problems aren’t specifically in the realm of a display protocol. However, this has led to some significant problems.
Specifically, since there is a power and implementation void, and the Wayland crew haven’t stepped in or endorsed any particular way to fill it, each compositor/desktop library is now implementing it’s own means to achieve these ends. This leads to other problems.
You want to write software for X for some of these things, and regardless of the DE you’re working in, there are more fundamental ways to address the information you need. But if you want to do so with Wayland, there’s no “fundamental” layer to reach for, because it’s handled by the DE compositor and toolkits.
So you need to do it the KDE way, or the Gnome way, or the wlroots way, etc etc - and what if you want it to work with all of them? Simple: just code it multiple times and deal with multiple different frameworks, each with their own learning curves, restrictions, and quirks.
…by which I mean, “/s, jk jk, not actually simple.”
Really, my hope at this point is that maybe kde/plasma and gnome will standardize around wlroots (i.e., there is no hope).
So, failing that - maybe a single library for accessibility that does the work once (multiple times, but once), and is adopted and used by kde/gnome/wlroots, and a single library that does the same for display sharing.
