Adding a new standard is hard and needs buy-in from at least one of gnome/kde/wlroots. Steam w/ Wine works out of the box with Wayland and GNOME on Fedora Workstation 36. It's not a sane security model if the product doesn't do what the users need it to do as a result. Im pretty sure wayland just follows the small core with plugins strategy. I like that I can run something fairly lightweight (FVWM, for example), instead of having to pull in most of the GNOME or KDE desktop incidentally because I want frames around my windows. Some stuff will break, some stuff will have to be abandoned. Now if we can just get one of those protocols to work on an individual application/window basis as opposed to the whole desktop. Windows and macOS are both strongly moving in this direction. Logically there is no particular reason it can't be done well on xwayland. There is a draft of xdg-foreign protocol extension, which allows obtaining handles of wl_surface's, created by other Wayland clients. The by cutting it out, we've also cut out the only commonality, the lowest common denominator software, sitting between widget libraries and the video drivers. That leaves legacy apps and toolkits that haven't gotten with the program. On Gnome-Shell you can use a built-in tool looking glass. i am happy on wayland, but i haven't noticed any difference. I had understood that this was also true under ~MacOS and~ Windows. It is up to the apps to use them. Announcing the Stacks Editor Beta release! Is the fact that ZFC implies that 1+1=2 an absolute truth? The problem for those that want to continue to use X -- well, Xserver to be specific -- is that nobody wants to maintain it. All I know is that with Wayland I cannot use Linux and Unix for over three decades. Wayland doesn't prevent anything that people need, but the APIs are different and apps need to be ported. Yes there are always solutions but it really doesn't matter because next release something new will break and you'll only find out when it blows up in your face. Oh man, it's a recipe for disaster. Can a human colony be self-sustaining without sunlight using mushrooms? To be fair for it to be a 1:1 replacement for xorg that does not mean it also needs to be drop-in (as in all software that works on xorg will work on Wayland right away). > Wayland isn't a complete replacment of Xorg and has never intended to be. > Then you can call them all luddites for caring more about working hardware than plumbing. I went looking for a video demoing the first statement and came across https://youtu.be/sdSFzZCgWp0.
If by "other options" you mean X11 only crackpots and luddites think applications should be able to spy on each other [0]. A replacement is overdue. Wayland probably could have done a better job of putting 99% of the code in libweston so that different compositors would only have to reimplement 1%. Props to the way Linux is designed that makes all this possible and not locked down but..man it gets annoying sometimes. However, this protocol still has limitations: So, this is unlikely to become a general way to get surface parameters from any client by any client. Good thing you have x11 and wayland then, for those that want all the features out of the box and don't want to handle the hassles of restricted gpus or installing a package for each feature: just go x11. Xs basic primitives are simply bad for todays hardware. > it has to get a certain network effect going for it. For example, screenshots. Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers. Agreed, I switched to Wayland and Sway when I upgraded to Ubuntu 22.04. From a theoretical view, why is it a bad thing? Flatpak has access to the `xdg-desktop-portal. Is there anything like xprop for X that allows the user to pick a window by clicking and outputs all window details, including PID? What do they mean by that? Besides, seccomp-bpf and windowing protocol security are orthogonal. Wayland doesn't feel like something you'd build a desktop with, it feels like a software API for digital signage or maybe something for an iPad-like UI. wmctrl), or other miscellaneous screen features (e.g. If there was a bad implementation, it could be fixed. Gimp and myriad of other X11 apps can't. The problem is that they shipped the thing with none of the additional extensions actually defined, which meant that when people went to implement everything outside of the (correctly) tiny core they implemented things differently and incompatibly. Even still, I think far more of the problems in this gist relate more to apps that just aren't well maintained (alike your NV gpu that has been a bad actor on the scene), aren't well cared for. This isn't automated because I really don't care because like many devices it only actually has one configuration but it would be trivial to do so by computing the exact scale based on difference in DPI. But then you are just claiming inconsistent things. That is true, although I've seen the support being cumbersome at best, specially with Nvidia drivers (although can't put the blame on anyone else other than Nvidia here obviously) even the default Gnome night light doesn't work as it should always. I get that many of the people involved were burnt out on it, and sure, no one (myself included) stepped up to the plate, but it doesn't seem plausible to me that X11 and Xorg are lost causes. I hope one day we'll have some solidity and stability in Linux with everyone building upon an agreed set of foundations so we can actually move forward instead of rebuilding the same wall over and over again. Having the handle, you can obtain from it anything you can obtain from surfaces of your client. You have to tinker the guts out of them sometimes. The most recent release had to be rolled back after four zero-day remote privilege escalations were found and given CVEs. After that they'll have to maintain both because it'll take at least a decade or two for everyone to reasonably migrate. I used Wayland for almost everything (AMD GPU), but the performance for some applications such as Blender are absolutely abysmal currently. Granted. So if the signalling was, that Wayland is inevitable by release XX.YY, apps would be ready. By clicking Accept all cookies, you agree Stack Exchange can store cookies on your device and disclose information in accordance with our Cookie Policy. So there is demand for API. This is an example of user hostility that goes a long way towards destroying adoption. I'm reminded of an early systemd security choice that killed all of a users processes on logout, for 'security'. Wayland was designed from the start completely neglecting normal every-day use cases. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Sure, agreed and the standard way this was done for decades was by sending a HUP signal to the processes. It is exactly how Apple does fractional scaling. programs that depend on third-party packages of dubious provenance, than I am concerned about the threat of desktop applications reaching across to interfere with each other and violating any (non-existent) expectation of isolation of the sort described here. Problem is that existing applications need to adapt for its use, and if the demand is low, it is not worth the money. That's just how GNOME/GTK handles scaling on any platform, it's unrelated to what the underlying display server can do. So it was a duplication of a kind. Want to write a screenshot or screen recording app, or an app that allows sharing your screen? Do not remove them, and you have complains, that every compositor has its own API (ignoring, that there is a standardized one too, now). BSD people really dislike it when Linux replaces legacy Unix infrastructure with Linux specific technologies. If you knew all your programs, and that they are well-behaved, there is no need for that. No, they don't. Proven by "people still use it, a LOT.". I used to have mild tearing before that, but after setting up picom (don't remember how I configured it exactly) I got buttery smooth output! They didn't think and things broke. Honestly it really wasn't until SGI and NeXT did we see powerful mini computers on the desk running GUI applications in the 90s. I'm not. In fact one could trivialize this at installation and write configuration to xorg.conf or xorg.conf.d. It's a downright fragmented mess. Just because it has been used for decades, doesnt mean it was ever good. I'm really not a fan of software being this presumptuous. On the other hand, if you start out by just letting everything run amok and then try to add controls later, assumptions will get changed underneath existing programs. In theory, you could invent a new protocol for X11 apps announcing their capabilities. With these, it supports WebRTC out of the box for browser, and for example OBS studio supports natively, and works really well. So I'm a bit more optimistic. As an enthusiast, how can I make a bicycle more reliable/less maintenance-intensive for use by a casual cyclist? Don't ban, just make it a user specific choice. And finally, the real problem here is that systemd breaks stuff like this all the time and makes the platform unpredictable unless you spend time reading the release notes. This part has been true for years actually. Just remember, after a while every observable behavior of a program will be dependent on. > or give up on Linux entirely and get a Mac. Even more so because it isn't yet ready about 6 years after its fanboys started insisting it was and shitting on other options and dismissing actual problems as the mutterings of crackpots and luddites. * Not having every app double as a key-logger. This post projects an idea that there is a new resurgence of push-back & dislike, a failure to come into fruition, but personally I feel there's been a long continual & ongoing history of refusenik/can't-do attitude, like nearly all new technologies & especially sizable open source developments face. I don't want one process to be able to decide that it's windows should be higher priority than another process, or see what's displayed on another processes windows, or steal keystrokes from windows owned by another process. For starters. Mac and Windows and Android are doing this. Nobody with close knowledge of the project has ever pretended it has - that premise just appears in severe oversimplifications and strawmen. If you grasp the window metaphorically and move it from screen to screen its size won't perceptively flutter because the screen differential in DPI is as far as its concerned within 1%. So yes, some apps that require advanced capabilities run much better in some compositors than others; the compositor choice matters. Not possible for everyone, as you may have software that doesn't work on Wayland, but I ran my daily driver Arch laptop with sway and no X at all for years, everything worked really well. MacOS does not allow screen sharing (say in Google Chat) of your entire desktop or other windows without user permission. > Red Hat doesn't believe in the Linux ecosystem. I don't want to give up actual functionality to solve imaginary problems. Of course not. For better or worse, users aren't paying even a small fraction of the development cost of the Linux desktop so the result is a volunteer hacker do-ocracy. But that is much easier to do than not getting soaked in the rain when all you have is a door in the middle of nowhere. I dont see any problem here, the slight slowness of certain proposals is simply the bazaar style development where unlike Apple, linux cant just decide on a fix thing, it has to get a certain network effect going for it firts. I was into lightweight desktop environments for a while and liked exploring that design space. That could have worked, but in reality nothing else was actually standardized (n.b. - Trivializing the gap between compromised developer and user by shortening the gap between compromise and distribution from days->weeks to minutes->hours. Obviously that breaks older software, but that is on purpose. I will again repeat myself there: and how does the display server know, if the app won't tell?
It isn't just one thing like this. No one in the Linux community holds that kind of sway (pun intended). There are official extensions to the protocol here https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols and there is also the Wlroots library that can be used to implement a compositor. The one thing that can't be determined automatically is the physical layout. How to get the start time of a long-running Linux process? In my ~6 years of using Wayland I've never experienced anything like this. Screenshots/recording should have been on the board from day one and they could have gotten to standardizing on how to handle them in oh 2013-2015? Wayland has a common core, but absolutely I'd grant that the various protocols do indeed make it a much less tightly coupled thing, with different compositors having different sets of protocols they support. But when most (every?) To be charitable one would suppose that its just a low priority as fewer people have high dpi displays. Paraphrasing Charity, "approved protocols don't matter if the users aren't happy". Wayland is just a part of a rethink of how Linux desktop architecture works, together with Freedesktop standards for things like screen casting or window control [1]. If X11 is going away without there being something to replace all of its use cases, then what are people supposed to do who need those automation tools, etc.? That's a problem. The solution is to use Pipewire and DBus to connect to proprietary APIs. Same with intercepting all keyboard input IIRC. I'm not saying all of this is easy, but it strains credibility to suggest that this could not have been accomplished in the past 12+ years since work started on Wayland. > Agreed. This is a solved problem, but you are correct that a lot of applications don't support it yet. Yes, it works well in Firefox if you have the needed packages installed [0]. Code completion isnt magic; it just feels that way (Ep. Instead of trying to hide the shortcomings, it exposed them and offered another solution, without them.
On X11 this is easy to get using xprop (to get WM_CLASS), but on Wayland I cannot find a way to get this information (called in Wayland the application ID I believe). How can I get the Wayland Application ID (WM_CLASS equivalent) for a running application? On Wayland is there a way today to get the currently focused windows title and process ID? Autoscaling mixed dpi configurations could be a check box checked by default and writing to xconfig could be a button like it is in nvidia-settings. The traditional, greybeard way to deal with a misbehaving application is to stop using it. What is the difference between Error Mitigation (EM) and Quantum Error Correction (QEC)? It gains too much control, if compared to. At least some of comments on supposed defects in the architecture of Wayland seem to me to be written by long-time X users who simply do not like change. The problem with projects like systemd and wayland isn't technical, it's social. A lot of its problems stem from design decisions that were made many years ago, and which are virtually impossible to fix. Compare that to Apple macOS. I recommend checking out systemd-run, which has a similar mode to basically nohup, you can even alias it to that. rev2022.7.20.42634. > I wonder if it would have made more sense to go with a paired approach-- a single master compositor implementation, with the complicated and more hardware-sensitive stuff involved, and a pluggable window manager that spoke to it. Where's your evidence of the actual, practical threat, besides merely gesturing to the (purported) imperative to follow their mitigation strategy? In 19 years I've never seen an application interfere with another in confusing or malicious ways. bash loop to replace middle of string after a certain character, How to encourage melee combat when ranged is a stronger option, Scientifically plausible way to sink a landmass. There's multiple distros, each with their own toolkits, own package managers, own cores etc. That's why programmers that Red Hat used to pay to hack on Xorg now get paid to develop Wayland [0]. To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers. There isn't a legitimate problem with handling the hup signal for interactive tools when the user is expecting it. You can either start a new Firefox process or go to the application switcher to see the updated window contents. > The whole "nVidia works, but only with the GNOME compositor" sort of stuff reads as a sign that there's way too much involved in there. Except no one ever said software design shouldnt allow it, which is the claim here. Well, it wasn't obvioushence the question. > > That is not a concern in the world that I or many people live in[]. If Wayland had a single official toolkit that means that today one DE (probably GNOME) would be using Wayland and every other DE would still be on Xorg (which is unmaintained). *` namespace, but everyone has their own implementation so saying they use the standard namespace is misleading as it makes it sound like all the work is done. Although Wayland isn't completely incompatible either but that difference doesn't matter. gyro reading of MPU6050 drifts too much on fast changes only. I think it's fascinating how general opinion seems to be becoming more neutral on Wayland compared to the rah-rah days I remember, probably around 2018-19. It's been a decade. This means that the most poorly written application on earth only has to contend with high dpi support not mixed DPI.
Even if Wayland had been a different project with the properties you desire (which at face value seem fair enough), that still wouldn't have delivered anything like the strawman 1:1 Xorg compatibility this blog talks about, nor would it likely have overcome the general messiness and lack of direction on the Linux desktop that's keeping both X11 and non-X11 desktops back. Turns out this was due to the compositor (wl-roots) evolving while the Chromium team didnt get the memo. It's like a return to the days when the web had multiple major browser engines, and every time you wanted to do something you had to look up what browsers implemented it and what charming little quirks each implementation had. I am trying to minimise the amount of C/C++ in my life: one nice thing about X is that X bindings exist for many languages which do not rely on xlib or xcb. Obviously, it won't work if not implemented in clients. There have been questions like this, or this one which ask basically the same question as I do, and the answer is: no, this is not intended and won't be supported by Wayland. For every 1 GNU GUI using Linux user, there are 100+ Linux installs that run completely headless. You can either start a new Firefox process or go to the application switcher to see the updated window contents. IDK. Nothing I have said is inconsistent, and I haven't said that the resulting implementation is bad although I disagree it's outside the realm of a display manager whan all of them had to implement an API to get it to work. I think one of the big old O'Reilly X11 reference books actually had a clumsy but functional example with line-by-line commentary. Local root exploits are cheap and pervasive, An excellent technology. Ive been using Electron apps natively on Wayland for quite a while with those force-enable flags you mentioned. As an enthusiast, how can I make a bicycle more reliable/less maintenance-intensive for use by a casual cyclist? (Certainly some compositors could demand higher standards, such as some of the experimental compositors requiring Vulkan, but generally compositors have very similar, very common requirements.). I understand the direction they decided to take. It's having first zero then more than one way to go about it and 13 years later ending up in the situation where some utilities support only X and some only some Wayland implementations. So I rephrase the question: as today, is there a way to programmatically get the currently active window title and PID on Wayland? > That is not a concern in the world that I or many people live in; the desktop is not expected to provide this type of Web browser-level isolation to provide protection from adversarial programs running on our machines. Can I put multiple X windows into a single larger window? Not to be so condescending but it's truly terrifying how horribly amateurish Linux Desktop is when the underlying system is so amazing. https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/22/d/macos-suhelpe https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2013-May/036276.html. The toolkits might even have to backport the Wayland related stuff a few versions. So you had a transition period where for instance OBS did not work on wayland, then it was updated and now it does. By clicking Accept all cookies, you agree Stack Exchange can store cookies on your device and disclose information in accordance with our Cookie Policy. The only reasonable solution (nested X servers and XSECURITY are not reasonable solutions) is to switch to Wayland. > Corporate computers frequently make screen shots or screen recordings of employee interactions. The Arch wiki page for Sway is a pretty good starting point: There is a Manjaro Sway community flavor if you want to USB boot something preconfigured and check it out. It really sucks when you don't expect it. Didnt take long for their patch to bubble up to the next Electron patch release. I'm facing the same problem. All in all, the basics of Wayland are a pretty tight package. You just don't. #2 is a solved problem. > Wherein your users and downstream projects like distros who actually care about user experience will take pains to avoid you.
Xwayland is probably going to be deprecated and removed anyway. What is the alternative? Here is an xrandr invocation that configures 3 screens [1080P 24"][4K 27"][1080p 24"]. Maybe that's not fair, but it sure feels like it. Wayland doesn't do that, and after 10 years of antagonizing Linux software development, I think it's safe to say it failed. Redshift) which effectively means that there is no way to do these things at all. > I mean, c'mon, here's a simple X11 "any app can read out the contents of any other window" solution: add access controls to Xorg so that they can't. The thing you're trying to defend against is not just hostile apps, but someone remotely achieving RCE in one of your network-exposed applications. [2]: In fairness, it covers enough that it's working for a lot of people's workflows. setxkbmap is another interesting thing. It wasn't advertised (clearly, because the distros rolled it back when it was discovered) and it broke stuff, because the people writing the new shiny hadn't even considered that it might be a legitimate use case. Whats malicious and ignorant is this comment. Strictly speaking, it is not a problem with hidpi. The argument is that X11 made a mistake by allowing it by default. Yes, I was using Wayland fairly comfortably but am now using x again thanks to screen sharing and all the different conference tools everyone uses. Out of curiosity: How do you get screen sharing on Discord? Do you understand my comment to contain an assertion that my computer is not vulnerable if I were to run an "npm install script adding a few lines to your bashrc"?
wayland xprop equivalent
