How to install enlightenment desktop with wayland?

[MagicPoulp]

Hi,

On buster, how can I install the enlightenment desktop with wayland?

Do I win anything building for wayland or should I just stick to the standard package in the debian repository?

I found this tutorial and it says it has to be built from source. but it has too many flags, it is hard to understand.
https://www.enlightenment.org/about-wayland

[MagicPoulp]

Elementary is just a library to make user interfaces with components, bttons, etc. Am I right?

What is EFL? Enlightenment FOundation Libraries? THey say it is used on miilions of computers. What is the purpose?

WHat is the difference between building only for wayland clients with a flag or using the readme for a wayland only version?

[GarryRicketson]

On buster, how can I install the enlightenment desktop with wayland?
=====
https://wiki.debian.org/Wayland
=====
https://packages.debian.org/buster/enlightenment

The instructions are available, all you needed to do was a simple search,
And the answer to this is obvious:

Do I win anything building for wayland or should I just stick to the standard package in the debian repository?

I found this tutorial and it says it has to be built from source. but it has too many flags, it is hard to understand.

No, you don't win anything, and obviously , since the tutorial is to hard for you to understand, and also it is all ways better to install from the debian repositories, if the package is available in them. The other multiple questions are also easily answered with some search foo.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

I like Arch's PKGBUILDs for checking stuff like this, they are so simple:

https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/pack ... enment#n31

EDIT: in Debian add a deb-src line to /etc/apt/sources.list and

Code: Select all

apt-get source enlightenment

to get all of the source files and the debian directory.

[MagicPoulp]

What is the difference between the –enable-wayland-clients flag or the wayland only version as given iat the enlightenment link I gave earlier? Is the first one only to make wayland based applicaiton work? So if you don't build with this flag a program requiring wayland will not work? I thought any program could work using XWayland. So why this flag?

Why should I get the source via debian?

The debian package is frozen to work with X11. Wayland is not ready yet in enlightenment. It is only experimental. Therefore, if I pick the latest from enlightenment.org, I will have more of the latest stuff to make wayland work.

Moreover, the version number is the same in Debian and in enlightenment.org: 0.22.4

[Wheelerof4te]

Why should I get the source via debian?

It's easier to compile it that way. You get only the source, and can set options and flags as you wish. It's the same version as upstream.

Wayland is not ready yet in enlightenment. It is only experimental.

Enlightement works with wayland, it is one of the few desktop options that do. The others are GNOME, Plasma and Sway.

[MagicPoulp]

Since the version numbers are exactly, the same, it should not matter. If I pick the one at enlightenment.org, I am sure to really have the latest.

You say "Enlightenment works with wayland". Yes. But they have an experimental version without any dependency to X11.

they say:

"Work is currently underway to land a complete Wayland compositor (stand-alone, no X11 needed) into the master branch of Enlightenment. At this stage, we are undergoing heavy testing and resolving any issues. We will definitely need to extend Wayland protocol to make a fully functioning desktop or mobile environment, but what we do have (based on the existing wayland protocol) is quite usable. "

So it seems quite ready to be used. Even is not 100% safe.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

But they have an experimental version without any dependency to X11

It's not really possible to have a fully functional Wayland desktop without using xwayland to allow X11-based applications to run.

[MagicPoulp]

I don't think the wayland only experimental version disallow XWayland.

THey probably mean they don't have remaining parts depending on X.

[Wheelerof4te]

I don't think
probably

Great detective skills you've got there.

[MagicPoulp]

There is nothing wrong with the structure "I don't think something".

Can someone please help me determine:
- if I use the debian wayland package, the vanilla one, will it us X when I use the firefox browser, or will it use wayland?
- was the debian package built using -enabble-wayland-clients?

[Wheelerof4te]

^

But they have an experimental version without any dependency to X11

It's not really possible to have a fully functional Wayland desktop without using xwayland to allow X11-based applications to run.

Great reading skills you've got there.

[MagicPoulp]

Please stop spamming my thread. You are allowed not to be interested.

From what I understand, the debian package does not run a Wayland compositor, but it does allow wayland client applications.

Therefore, you are wrong to come and shout hey the debian documentation says enlightenment runs wayland.

That the experimental version runs a wayland compositor makes it be called wayland only. It does not mean that it exclude any xwayland application to work. But it does have the internal parts independent of X11.

[Wheelerof4te]

Install enlightenment DE and install inxi.
While in the DE, run

Code: Select all

inxi -G

as a normal user. If it says wayland, then wayland is active.

Run some system info program like top. If you have xwayland process active, then it runs xwayland, too.

[MagicPoulp]

It seems to me the enlightenment documentation is quite clear that only a special experimental build will run enlightenment as a wayland compositor.

It seems to me the debian package relies heavily on X11 for everything. There may be a wayland process active to allow wayland client applications.

[Wheelerof4te]

There may be a wayland process active to allow wayland client applications.

There are no "wayland client applications". Such a thing does not exist (except maybe grim, mako and slurp, but those are very recent and specific). There are only applications that support wayland and run on it natively. As you know, all current applications that can run on Wayland also run on Xorg.

I think you are not informed very well or lack the knowledge on how wayland works. Sway windows manager is so far the only active wayland compositor built for wayland from scratch. All others have previously only worked on Xorg, and have added Wayland support later. That means there are not many, if at all, wayland only proper applications.

[MagicPoulp]

"wayland client applications"="client-side applications"

From the enlightenment doc:
https://www.enlightenment.org/about-wayland
"Current support work is being done to enable client-side applications and a wayland compositor."

Moreover, the build has a special flag enable-wayland-clients

Concerning how much enlightenment depend on X, I don't know. The best would be to check the source code. But the documentation says enough.

ANd what about my question? If I use a browser like firefox under enlightenment, will it use X? Will my bash shell us X?

[Wheelerof4te]

Moreover, the build has a special flag enable-wayland-clients

From the Wayland home page:

Wayland is a protocol for a compositor to talk to its clients as well as a C library implementation of that protocol. The compositor can be a standalone display server running on Linux kernel modesetting and evdev input devices, an X application, or a wayland client itself. The clients can be traditional applications, X servers (rootless or fullscreen) or other display servers.

ANd what about my question? If I use a browser like firefox under enlightenment, will it use X? Will my bash shell us X?

Firefox will still use X by default, even though theoretically it has wayland support. Fedora is thinking about providing Firefox with wayland by default by version 31.

Maybe I'm just feeding a troll, or maybe you're being ignorant. Either way, I'm done with this thread, as there's not much to add to it.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

Sway windows manager is so far the only active wayland compositor built for wayland from scratch. All others have previously only worked on Xorg, and have added Wayland support later.

Perhaps you need to practice your reading skills:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/wa ... ompositors

[Wheelerof4te]

^Keywords being "active" and "from scratch". Mutter started out as a X11 windows manager, kwin started out as a X11 window manager. The rest of the wlroots based compositors are still in their alpha stages, barely usable even in a testing environment when compared to sway.

It doesn't suit you to nitpick about things.