Wayland thread

Here you can discuss every aspect of Debian. Note: not for support requests!
Message
Author
Bulkley
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2006-02-11 18:35
Been thanked: 2 times

Wayland thread

#1 Post by Bulkley »

As H.O.A.S. suggested elsewhere, let's have a Wayland thread. This monster has been coming down the pipes for years but most of us know little to nothing about it. Yes, Xorg is getting senile and needs either juicing up or replacement. Wayland looks to be the main candidate for the slot but as near as I can tell it is not going to be a drop in replacement. Gnome now requires xwayland and won't work with xorg. To me, that's not progress; it leads to the same mess we have with Systemd with everything having to adapt to the monster.

So, let's have it. Good. Bad. What do we need to know. How do we configure Openbox and Xfce and all the other window managers to run happily with Wayland?

vmclark
Posts: 186
Joined: 2008-07-30 15:16

Re: Wayland thread

#2 Post by vmclark »

All I know is my debian gnome runs perfectly on Wayland. Haven't tried others. Know that it doesn't work on KDE.

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 13446
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: /dev/chair

Re: Wayland thread

#3 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Bulkley wrote:Xorg is getting senile
It's a bit more than that. X was being developed almost entirely by Red Hat but they've now decided to stop. This is from June 2019:
Christian F.K. Schaller wrote:Once we are done with this we expect X.org to go into hard maintenance mode fairly quickly. The reality is that X.org is basically maintained by us and thus once we stop paying attention to it there is unlikely to be any major new releases coming out and there might even be some bitrot setting in over time. We will keep an eye on it as we will want to ensure X.org stays supportable until the end of the RHEL8 lifecycle at a minimum, but let this be a friendly notice for everyone who rely the work we do maintaining the Linux graphics stack, get onto Wayland, that is where the future is.
https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2019/06/ ... tation-31/

And this is from the maintainer himself:
Adam Jackson wrote:So, is Xorg abandoned? To the extent that that means using it to actually control the display, and not just keep X apps running, I'd say yes.
https://ajaxnwnk.blogspot.com/2020/10/o ... erver.html

v1.20 was released in 2018 and it doesn't look like v1.21 will ever be released.
Bulkley wrote:Gnome now requires xwayland and won't work with xorg.
That's not true. I still have an option to run GNOME 40 under X in my Arch system and it is also supported for v3.38 in Debian bullseye.
Bulkley wrote:To me, that's not progress; it leads to the same mess we have with Systemd with everything having to adapt to the monster.
Just like everything had to adapt to X then? :mrgreen:
Bulkley wrote:Good
Under X I always had problems with screen tearing and if I used a compositor to fix that I then experienced lag when moving windows. With Wayland there is no tearing and no lag.
Bulkley wrote:Bad
I can't use X.Org configuration files so I have to rely on the configuration tools offered by the Wayland compositor instead.
Bulkley wrote:How do we configure Openbox and Xfce and all the other window managers to run happily with Wayland?
You can't. New Wayland compositors will have to be written that duplicate their functionality.

One of the BunsensLabs developers is working on an Openbox clone for Wayland:

https://github.com/johanmalm/labwc

The Wayland developers have a nice FAQ:

https://wayland.freedesktop.org/faq.html
Black Lives Matter

Debian buster-backports ISO image: for new hardware support

CwF
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2018-06-20 15:16
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Wayland thread

#4 Post by CwF »

The question is a little ironic in the way I look at things. I'm the first to criticize that many ways to do the same thing is not a benefit while none of them are complete, and that's the way I see Linux. I want the way that's complete.
In this case there is a group eager to move over, consolidate, and focus on a single way - you'd think I'd be in favor of that. The issue is X is very complete in the way I use it, and wayland is void of the ability.
"No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote rendering you need to define a rendering API, which is something I've been very careful to avoid doing. "
This category of usage is either of primary importance or irrelevant. On the irrelevant side wayland could be fine. Just don't pretend it's capable where by definition - it is not.

Wayland is a superior subset of functionality that may cover many users. Outside of that subset it can't be considered an alternative.

Since my bullseye xfce's are done, I won't be wondering for a few years...

User avatar
ticojohn
Posts: 1088
Joined: 2009-08-29 18:10
Location: /home/heart
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Wayland thread

#5 Post by ticojohn »

Personally, I just want it to work. However, my preferred DE is XFCE and as far as I can tell Wayland is a no-go. XFCE may eventually be written to use Wayland but until then I will use X.
I am not irrational, I'm just quantum probabilistic.

trinidad
Posts: 211
Joined: 2016-08-04 14:58
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Wayland thread

#6 Post by trinidad »

Wow HoaS an excellent answer. Mentioned every fallacy I noticed in the original post.

The nod to Bunsen was nice and add these too:
https://github.com/wizbright/waybox
https://swaywm.org/
https://github.com/WayfireWM/wayfire

And it is a fact that wayland for KDE is mostly complete or will be soon, and yes gnome still runs on X, and I too have a lot less problems with wayland, but I'm on gnome on buster on my main system. A Debian user can work either way... X or wayland... so there really shouldn't be any controversy. Originally XFCE was the go to lightweight full DE but that is no longer true as recent numbers from KDE have shown, though it was previously often considered to be the heaviest. I stopped using both XFCE and KDE on Debian when jessie came out. I still recommend Linux Lite to new Linux users and it is XFCE, but who knows for how long? Thankfully wayland is here for the future. I'm sure it will get cleaner rather than dirtier as time goes by, which is its primary advantage over X.

TC
You can't believe your eyes if your imagination is out of focus.

Bulkley
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2006-02-11 18:35
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wayland thread

#7 Post by Bulkley »

Image

This is Debian 10 running Openbox on xwayland. I used Debian 10because I already had it running in a VM so all I had to do was to remove xorg and install xwayland. I have no idea how it would work as a daily driver.

Bulkley
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2006-02-11 18:35
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wayland thread

#8 Post by Bulkley »

Note: the setup described above does not have a display manager. Xwayland is started with startx. That may be important.

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 13446
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: /dev/chair

Re: Wayland thread

#9 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

The xwayland package is for running X applications within a Wayland display server. It isn't needed to run openbox.
Bulkley wrote:all I had to do was to remove xorg
That's just a metapackage. All it supplies are some documentation files and Lintian overrides.
Black Lives Matter

Debian buster-backports ISO image: for new hardware support

Bulkley
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2006-02-11 18:35
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wayland thread

#10 Post by Bulkley »

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:
Bulkley wrote:all I had to do was to remove xorg
That's just a metapackage. All it supplies are some documentation files and Lintian overrides.
So, as above set up, which is Openbox running on?

Yes, Openbox does not need xwayland to run. Nothing that I run needs Wayland as near as I can tell. So, what's it good for other than Gnome? If Wayland is going to be the default, how do we adapt it to whichever WM we are using? Will it run XFCE?

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 13446
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: /dev/chair

Re: Wayland thread

#11 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Bulkley wrote:which is Openbox running on?
It's using X, as provided by the xserver-xorg-core package.
Bulkley wrote:what's it good for other than Gnome?
The X codebase is huge and ancient so the developers want to start afresh with a better paradigm rather than keep adding new extensions to old code.
Bulkley wrote:If Wayland is going to be the default, how do we adapt it to whichever WM we are using?
You don't. You will have to switch to a Wayland "window manager" (compositor) that does what you want.
Bulkley wrote:Will it run XFCE?
Xfce are planning to add a Wayland version of their desktop:

https://wiki.xfce.org/releng/wayland_roadmap
Black Lives Matter

Debian buster-backports ISO image: for new hardware support

Bulkley
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2006-02-11 18:35
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wayland thread

#12 Post by Bulkley »

Thanks. I'm having an hard time getting my head around this. I always expected that Wayland would be a drop in replacement for X but apparently not. Calling Wayland a compositor leads me down the wrong path because, to me, a compositor is that little program that allows me to make a Xfce panel transparent. Then, Web postings like Openbox versus Wayland confuse me over an apples versus oranges argument. What?

From the link:
CON A big mess
Wayland breaks everything and then expects others to fix the wreckage it caused on their own expense.
Last edited by Bulkley on 2021-04-01 20:11, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
oswaldkelso
Posts: 1325
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Wayland thread

#13 Post by oswaldkelso »

X is Huge but very modular being quite Unix like. You don't need all of it you can pick n choose. How modular is Wayland?

How long will wayland maintain xwayland?

What about functionality and bloat. How heavy is it compared to say running Xorg and openbox.

The WMs I currently use as opposed to just have installed are light and while some require a few extras to make truly functional notion4 does not.

ps_mem.py

496.0 KiB evilwm
10.0 MiB Xorg

3.1 MiB icewm
1.0 MiB icewmbg
1.2 MiB icewmtray
9.9 MiB Xorg

2.7 MiB notion
13.4 MiB Xorg

1.7 MiB twm
7.9 MiB Xorg

496.0 KiB evilwm
10.0 MiB Xorg

What can't wayland do that exists in Xorg?

Has it become another Redhat dictate and if so what will be the point of Debian once all and sundry only offer flatpacks and snaps etc. Will it be Redhats "Embrace, extend, and extinguish" as a way to control the market and their revenue. I mean, pulseaudio, systemd, wayland where will it stop? Can it be stopped by anyone except another big player with paid devs. If not what will we end up with? A windows 10 clone and compulsory upgrades? Debian had to kowtow to systemd not because it was such a great idea but because open code or not they do not have the volunteer dev power to keep up with fast code changes. Is this healthy or have the big corps won.

PS: I'm slow to change and very much in the if it aint broke don't fix it camp. :mrgreen:
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 13446
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: /dev/chair

Re: Wayland thread

#14 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

Bulkley wrote:Calling Wayland a compositor leads me down the wrong path because, to me, a compositor is that little program that allows me to make a Xfce panel transparent.
Yes, it is a bit confusing. The full name would be "compositing window manager" and they are so-called because the window manager handles the compositing itself.
Bulkley wrote:From the link:
CON A big mess
Wayland breaks everything and then expects others to fix the wreckage it caused on their own expense.
That's just FUD. Some things don't work under Wayland by design (such as root-owned GUI applications) and some things need re-implementing under Wayland.

Read https://drewdevault.com/2019/02/10/Wayl ... unked.html & https://drewdevault.com/2021/02/02/Anti ... eshit.html for an informed opinion about this (Drew DeVault wrote sway and the wlroots compositor).

If you want to understand Wayland better read this overview: https://frontpagelinux.com/articles/a-d ... for-linux/
oswaldkelso wrote:How modular is Wayland?
Wayland is just a protocol, anybody who implements it in a compositor can include whatever they want. For example there are Wayland clones of dwm being developed: https://github.com/djpohly/dwl
oswaldkelso wrote:How long will wayland maintain xwayland?
I don't know.
oswaldkelso wrote:What about functionality and bloat. How heavy is it compared to say running Xorg and openbox.
This is from my Arch box running openbox/tint2:

Code: Select all

 Private  +   Shared  =  RAM used       Program

288.0 KiB + 536.0 KiB = 824.0 KiB       startx
260.0 KiB + 626.0 KiB = 886.0 KiB       xinit
704.0 KiB +   2.0 MiB =   2.7 MiB       agent
932.0 KiB +   2.3 MiB =   3.2 MiB       doas
  1.6 MiB +   2.9 MiB =   4.5 MiB       login
  1.3 MiB +   3.3 MiB =   4.6 MiB       systemd-logind [updated]
  1.5 MiB +   3.2 MiB =   4.7 MiB       systemd-timesyncd [updated]
  2.2 MiB +   4.0 MiB =   6.2 MiB       systemd-udevd
  2.7 MiB +   3.6 MiB =   6.3 MiB       dbus-daemon
  3.1 MiB +   3.3 MiB =   6.4 MiB       iwd
  2.5 MiB +   4.6 MiB =   7.1 MiB       agetty (5)
  4.3 MiB +   6.1 MiB =  10.3 MiB       accounts-daemon
  6.7 MiB +   7.3 MiB =  14.1 MiB       systemd
  5.5 MiB +   8.9 MiB =  14.4 MiB       xterm
  5.8 MiB +   9.5 MiB =  15.3 MiB       zsh (2)
  5.9 MiB +  13.8 MiB =  19.7 MiB       tint2
  6.8 MiB +  14.8 MiB =  21.6 MiB       openbox
  9.7 MiB +  14.3 MiB =  24.0 MiB       python3.9
 13.3 MiB +  15.3 MiB =  28.6 MiB       systemd-journald [updated]
 16.7 MiB +  19.1 MiB =  35.7 MiB       polkitd
 36.5 MiB +  71.3 MiB = 107.8 MiB       volumeicon
 74.5 MiB + 103.9 MiB = 178.4 MiB       Xorg
---------------------------------
                        517.4 MiB
=================================
And this is the same machine running sway:

Code: Select all

 Private  +   Shared  =  RAM used       Program

172.0 KiB + 438.0 KiB = 610.0 KiB       sleep
280.0 KiB + 590.0 KiB = 870.0 KiB       status
332.0 KiB + 960.0 KiB =   1.3 MiB       swayidle
384.0 KiB +   1.1 MiB =   1.5 MiB       rtkit-daemon
936.0 KiB +   2.5 MiB =   3.4 MiB       doas
  1.3 MiB +   3.3 MiB =   4.6 MiB       systemd-logind [updated]
  1.6 MiB +   3.1 MiB =   4.7 MiB       login
  1.5 MiB +   3.3 MiB =   4.8 MiB       systemd-timesyncd [updated]
  2.2 MiB +   4.0 MiB =   6.2 MiB       systemd-udevd
  2.7 MiB +   3.7 MiB =   6.4 MiB       dbus-daemon
  3.1 MiB +   3.3 MiB =   6.4 MiB       iwd
  2.5 MiB +   4.7 MiB =   7.2 MiB       agetty (5)
  4.5 MiB +   6.9 MiB =  11.4 MiB       accounts-daemon
  2.6 MiB +   9.4 MiB =  12.0 MiB       swaybar
  1.5 MiB +  12.2 MiB =  13.7 MiB       swaybg
  6.7 MiB +   7.3 MiB =  14.1 MiB       systemd
  6.0 MiB +  10.2 MiB =  16.2 MiB       zsh (2)
  6.0 MiB +  19.2 MiB =  25.2 MiB       foot
 13.8 MiB +  15.6 MiB =  29.4 MiB       systemd-journald [updated]
 16.5 MiB +  20.4 MiB =  36.9 MiB       polkitd
 85.9 MiB + 112.1 MiB = 198.0 MiB       sway
---------------------------------
                        404.6 MiB
=================================
I know you don't like volumeicon so if you take that out of the equation I would call it a draw — sway is using roughly the same memory as Xorg+openbox :)
oswaldkelso wrote:What can't wayland do that exists in Xorg?
See the first Drew DeVault link I posted above or read https://gist.github.com/probonopd/9feb7 ... 9f2d1f2277 if you prefer FUD :mrgreen:
oswaldkelso wrote:Has it become another Redhat dictate
That's a meaningless question. As I noted in my first post X was being developed almost exclusively by Red Hat and anyway desktop users are such a pathetically miniscule fraction of Linux boxen that they are irrelevant to the corporations (IMO).
oswaldkelso wrote:have the big corps won
Oh yes, a long time ago.

See also https://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/about/board
Black Lives Matter

Debian buster-backports ISO image: for new hardware support

User avatar
oswaldkelso
Posts: 1325
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Wayland thread

#15 Post by oswaldkelso »

Sorry for the late reply

So swallow the blue pill it is then :-)

Re the bloat.
I thought it unfair to compare your ps_mem results with my D2 install, it being so old and obvioulsy lighter so I installed openbox and tint2 on Slackware

Code: Select all

 Private  +   Shared  =  RAM used	Program

  4.0 KiB +  38.5 KiB =  42.5 KiB	inetd
  4.0 KiB +  67.0 KiB =  71.0 KiB	sshd
 36.0 KiB +  38.5 KiB =  74.5 KiB	atd
 52.0 KiB +  35.0 KiB =  87.0 KiB	init
 84.0 KiB +  34.0 KiB = 118.0 KiB	klogd
108.0 KiB +  45.0 KiB = 153.0 KiB	syslogd
108.0 KiB +  61.5 KiB = 169.5 KiB	crond
156.0 KiB +  44.5 KiB = 200.5 KiB	gpm
152.0 KiB +  49.0 KiB = 201.0 KiB	acpid
216.0 KiB +  44.0 KiB = 260.0 KiB	dhcpcd
 20.0 KiB + 249.5 KiB = 269.5 KiB	agetty (5)
100.0 KiB + 174.5 KiB = 274.5 KiB	cupsd
236.0 KiB + 153.0 KiB = 389.0 KiB	cgmanager
192.0 KiB + 200.0 KiB = 392.0 KiB	xinit
352.0 KiB + 261.5 KiB = 613.5 KiB	dbus-launch
308.0 KiB + 311.5 KiB = 619.5 KiB	ck-launch-session
660.0 KiB +  87.5 KiB = 747.5 KiB	udevd
544.0 KiB + 446.5 KiB = 990.5 KiB	polkitd
864.0 KiB + 151.0 KiB =   1.0 MiB	bluetoothd
672.0 KiB + 404.5 KiB =   1.1 MiB	dbus-daemon (2)
832.0 KiB + 414.0 KiB =   1.2 MiB	upowerd
  1.0 MiB + 482.5 KiB =   1.5 MiB	console-kit-daemon
  1.5 MiB + 569.5 KiB =   2.0 MiB	udisksd
  1.6 MiB + 671.0 KiB =   2.3 MiB	gvfsd
  2.3 MiB + 863.0 KiB =   3.2 MiB	xterm
  1.9 MiB +   1.4 MiB =   3.3 MiB	bash (4)
  2.9 MiB +   1.1 MiB =   4.0 MiB	gvfsd-fuse
  4.1 MiB +   3.0 MiB =   7.0 MiB	openbox
  4.1 MiB +   3.1 MiB =   7.2 MiB	tint2
 15.5 MiB +   2.6 MiB =  18.1 MiB	Xorg
---------------------------------
                         57.5 MiB
=================================
I couldn't help notice that your potteringware was as heavy as my default notion4 install

Code: Select all

 Private  +   Shared  =  RAM used	Program

  4.0 KiB +  40.5 KiB =  44.5 KiB	inetd
  4.0 KiB +  72.0 KiB =  76.0 KiB	sshd
 36.0 KiB +  40.5 KiB =  76.5 KiB	atd
 52.0 KiB +  37.0 KiB =  89.0 KiB	init
 84.0 KiB +  37.0 KiB = 121.0 KiB	klogd
108.0 KiB +  48.0 KiB = 156.0 KiB	syslogd
108.0 KiB +  66.5 KiB = 174.5 KiB	crond
140.0 KiB +  53.0 KiB = 193.0 KiB	acpid
156.0 KiB +  49.5 KiB = 205.5 KiB	gpm
216.0 KiB +  49.0 KiB = 265.0 KiB	dhcpcd
 88.0 KiB + 190.5 KiB = 278.5 KiB	cupsd
 20.0 KiB + 262.5 KiB = 282.5 KiB	agetty (5)
236.0 KiB + 162.0 KiB = 398.0 KiB	cgmanager
196.0 KiB + 289.0 KiB = 485.0 KiB	xinit
316.0 KiB + 216.5 KiB = 532.5 KiB	fittstool
592.0 KiB +  94.5 KiB = 686.5 KiB	udevd
628.0 KiB + 110.0 KiB = 738.0 KiB	dbus-daemon
364.0 KiB + 411.5 KiB = 775.5 KiB	ck-launch-session
864.0 KiB + 183.0 KiB =   1.0 MiB	bluetoothd
908.0 KiB + 523.0 KiB =   1.4 MiB	upowerd
  1.0 MiB + 641.5 KiB =   1.6 MiB	console-kit-daemon
  2.1 MiB + 778.5 KiB =   2.9 MiB	udisksd
  2.6 MiB + 650.5 KiB =   3.2 MiB	polkitd
  2.0 MiB +   1.4 MiB =   3.4 MiB	bash (4)
  2.7 MiB +   1.1 MiB =   3.8 MiB	xterm
  3.3 MiB +   1.0 MiB =   4.3 MiB	notion
 16.1 MiB + 856.5 KiB =  17.0 MiB	Xorg
---------------------------------
                         44.1 MiB
=================================
Your Arch install must be broken :mrgreen:
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

anticapitalista
Posts: 391
Joined: 2007-12-14 23:16

Re: Wayland thread

#16 Post by anticapitalista »

Which version of Slackware is that?
antiX with runit - lean and mean.
https://antixlinux.com

User avatar
oswaldkelso
Posts: 1325
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Wayland thread

#17 Post by oswaldkelso »

anticapitalista wrote:Which version of Slackware is that?
bash-4.3$ cat /etc/slackware-version
Slackware 14.2
64bit No KDE
Free Software Matters
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

millpond
Posts: 700
Joined: 2014-06-25 04:56

Re: Wayland thread

#18 Post by millpond »

Is there any way to recompile Wayland to allow root access?

There are plenty of valid reasons for GUI access as root.

User avatar
VentGrey
Posts: 171
Joined: 2016-04-26 23:57
Location: Guanajuato México

Re: Wayland thread

#19 Post by VentGrey »

I like the improved security and speed wayland brings, I see don't think it is a 1:1 xorg replacement for me.

It does handle my mouse gestures way better and I don't experience the horrible "dead touchpad" issue that comes with some ELANTECH touchpads. However things like not being able to zoom in in Eye of Gnome (eog) using the two finger gesture or restarting the gnome-shell using alt+f2+r make me choose Xorg to this day.

But I think it's just a matter of time before those get fixed :B
I would exchange everything I know in exchange for half of what I don't.

Victor Brand
Posts: 18
Joined: 2021-09-10 16:35
Location: St. Petersburg, Russia
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Wayland thread

#20 Post by Victor Brand »

I'm considering switching to sway, but there are some programs which I'm used to use in Xorg and for which I still didn't find wayland alternatives. Those are:

1. Sound volume indicator in tray. I use volumeicon as of now, but it seems not to be working in sway.
2. The same is for udiskie tray indicator.
3. Are there any alternatives for xfce4-power-manager under sway? OK, I can manage screen locking and switching off via idle utilities (and also there are laptop-mode-tools and acipid), but how about automatic inhibiting of screen locking while watching videos and so on?
4. Last but not least, conky. I haven't managed to make conky consistently work under xwayland. Are there any viable alternatives to it? I'm pondering about using conky-cli and displaying its output via swaybar (or waybar?), but I'm still to figure out how to do that.

Regards.

Post Reply