>mfw there is people who still defends Xorg
http://datenwolf.net/bl20110930-0001/
Wonder why this piece of crap still is alive.
I don't get why people bitch so much about xorg.
Sure, it has faults but they don't really matter to the end-user.
>>51997696
Wayland hype train
>>51997714
Save that shit until I can use a Wayland display server without a fuck ton of fdo crap and with proprietary drivers.
>>51997696
It matters, it is 2015 and I still have screen tearing when using Linux.
>>51997779
Yeah, because you can't have compositing with X...
>>51997779
What makes you think x is the issue and not your drivers?
>>51997742
The proprietary drivers have to change to work with Wayland. Wayland is a fundamentally different model to the traditional display model.
>>51997819
and until they do, I don't care about wayland
what's so hard to understand?
>>51997661
http://datenwolf.net/bl20111227-0001/
hahah, I'm sure it's not 4chan
>>51997826
This. Wayland/Mir/Whatever is dead to me until I can use real graphic drivers with it.
i'll use wayland once openbox is ported
i already use KMS/a compatible free graphics driver, all i'm waiting on is a WM (or rather, a wayland compositor) that i like
>>51997932
>is ported
it has to be completely rewritten
wayland has no concept of window managers
every "window manager" is its own display server
>>51997826
>>51997886
Enjoy your screen tearing, user mode terminals, and general graphics instability.
>>51997972
>i can't setup X right therefore it's shit
>>51997696
Actually, it does matter.
Linux/Unix is always pitched as more secure by default, but if you want to use them as desktop, literally you have to install a rootkit to get a usable GUI.
Even Windows keyloggers can't listen all the pulsations of all users, but in X11 obtain the root password is trivial as fuck.
And of course, the performance issues with compositing.
>>51997965
i know
>>51998002
>can't listen all the pulsations of all users
only if you use the same x server for all users
>>51997787
Actually, no. Compositing is shoe-horned in X11.
Compositors who work well introduce performance penalty. And the others (Compton and shit) doesn't work very well without driver tweaking.
>>51998022
And that's the common configuration, with easy switching, and related shit.
Oh, and all programs have access to the windows of other programs
>>51998002
Wayland doesn't solve that, wayland has shit to do with input.
Some wayland display servers like weston do solve that - but with some horribly awful shit like logind
>>51997997
>I enjoy 1980's graphics bloat.
>>51997932
>openbox
>XML configuration
>XBM window decorations
>in fucking 2015
>>51998054
>logind is the evil
Spotted the sysvinit lover.
>>51997997
There's nothing you can do to configure X to fix these problems.
>>51998073
>mfw even Windows had properly working HWA window compositing since Vista, and linux still can't do it.
>>51998067
>complains about X bloat
>advocates poettering and freedesktop crap
>>51998086
There's nothing about the kernel that prevents it from being done.
>>51997932
I think the best way to get Openbox is to program a weston plugin who
>accepts gtk theming
>adds a menu in the desktop
>reads the XML config (And also accepts a more sane way to configure, like ini files)
>etc, etc
Really, I don't that Dana will port openbox anyways.
>>51998086
protip: linux does do any window drawing beyond unicode text
>>51997661
he doesn't really defend xorg all that much
seems like he's instead advocating something like NeWS or Quartz
>>51998104
"Linux" is the name of an OS anon. Do try to educate yourself.
>>51998149
Says the one implying that Linux is tied to its graphic stacks.
>>51998185
It is. The graphics stack is part of the OS.
>>51998215
So what I'm running on my home server isn't Linux?
>>51998215
Is it not. An OS merely provides abstraction between hardware and userspace programs.
>>51998094
Yeah, since I use logind, cgroups, containers, .service files, .timer files, a sane VT subsystem in the future and all the niceties who systemd has bringed to linux ecosystem.
But I never had used X logical font descriptors, primitives, network redireccion (who is broken anyways), code tables, glyph rasterization, etc. etc. Actually, the only use I do to X is being a fucking giant bitmap dumpster. And very crappy one.
You can argue anything about systemd being giant, but bloated isn't. Almost always you're using the some of the niceties of systemd, and is maintained and the hackers (appears) to know how systemd works.
Instead, Xorg barely does the work for what was designed, doesn't do it well, and mostly important, X is so fucking complex and ridden with legacy code that only two or three developers knows how some of these subsystems works. And if they die, well, X11 development is pretty much fucked.
>>51998248
Is what i run on my raspberrypi not windows? Simply not installing the graphics stack for linux does not mean it is suddenly not the graphics stack for the OS.
>An OS merely provides abstraction between hardware and userspace programs.
that's the kernel anon. The OS is everything else needed to run programs for the user to use. This includes the graphics stack and desktop environment.
>>51998248
You're still using some kernel mode setting. At least internately.
>>51998149
"Android" is the name of an OS. SurfaceFlinger can do HWA compositing just fine.
>>51998304
Wonder why no one tried to do a DE in desktop linux using surface flinger...
>>51998304
I'm not talking about Android. I'm talking about Linux OS.
>>51998338
In this context is better to say GNU/Linux
>>51998291
that's really stretching what a graphics stack
and i think there a linux setups with no mode setting whatsoever, router setups for example
>>51998331
because Linux is not an OS.
>>51998359
But it's technically correct. Linux does have a graphic stack.
Anyways, in the case of X11, having or not a graphic stack in the kernel doesn't matter, the problems with X11 doesn't solve with that only.
>>51998369
>Wonder why no one tried to do a DE in GNU/linux using surface flinger...
Are you happy, Stallmanu?
>>51998375
>Linux does have a graphic stack.
It's not about having one, the discussion about it being tied to it.
Which it obviously isn't when it's optional.
>>51998390
Surface flinger doesn't work on GNU/Linux though.
>>51998409
No one said it was "tied" to it. They only claimed it had one, and can't do what Vista's could do.
>>51998375
Linux doesn't have a graphics stack. There exist graphics stacks for Linux.
Stating Linux itself can't do something graphics-related implies whoever maintains Linux can do something about it, which is false.
>>51998390
because the developers who would possibly care about this are happy enough with the effort going into x.org and Wayland.
>>51998432
Yes, they did.
Follow the reply chain.
>>51998441
Oh, well. I learned something today.
Thanks anon.
>>51998441
>implies whoever maintains Linux can do something about it, which is false.
it doesn't though. Anyone could add a working compositor to linux if they wanted. Wayland is nearly there, but certainly not there yet. All anyone is saying is linux can't do it today with *any* of the graphics stacks available, and Windows could do it just fine when vista came out. OS X could do it for even longer.
>MFW
>>51998457
I was the first post that people started responding to.
>>51998478
But I'm using wayland in my Korora box with GNOME.
Actually, what are you expecting are the compositors, and almost anything who isn't gnome is half backed.
>>51997779
>it is 2015 and I still have screen tearing
All I had to do was enable TearFree (on radeon).
>>51998478
Linux cannot do it at all given the fact that any graphics beyond text is none of its concern.
>>51998490
No, you're not.
That was me
>>51998505
Hardly any hardware supports wayland compositing yet though.
>>51998544
Well, I'm using intel graphics, since it's all the shit I need.
Also, if you don't have KMS with your drivers, you always can fallback to using framebuffers.
>>51998519
Yes it is, X, Gnome, KDE etc are all things that are part of Linux. Why do you think it's called GNU/Linux? All the programs and terminal shit in GNU is considered part of the OS. Same with the graphics stacks.
You might as well claim the desktop isn't part of Windows because it's possible to not install it.
>>51998577
that's a fucking stupid argument
that's like saying any 3rd party software i install on windows is now somehow part of the OS
>>51998577
You might as well say clothes are body parts.
>>51998279
>so fucking complex and ridden with legacy code that only two or three developers knows how some of these subsystems works
So just like Linux? Now we'll have 3 standards, do you think that will make shit easier for developers? Xorg will still be in use for years after wayland becomes default in major DEs and Mir will inherit most Ubantoo users.
Nvidia wayland drivers when?
>inb4 proprietary scum
Sometimes I emulate shit sorry.
>>51998577
No not really. X11 is not Linux (or any form of Unix for that matter). X11 is a system that's relies upon Linux and GNU but it is not a Linux project nor a GNU project.
>>51998628
It's not, because it's not included with the OS. If it was, it could be considered part of the OS.
IE is considered part of Windows OS. But it's not part of Windows N editions. Why? Because you have to install it separately on Windows N.
>>51998628
3rd party drivers will always be a part of the OS
>>51998628
It is and it isn't. 3rd party system software do form part of the OS, but these are additions to the OS and not an inherent part of the OS.
>>51998664
>do form part of the OS
>not an inherent part of the OS.
so.. they are part of the OS...
>>51998677
>install linux
>no X, no KDE, etc
>somehow gnome is still part of the OS
???
>>51997779
I don't. Quit using xfeces.
>>51998705
They are not part of your distribution, but they are part of plenty of others.
>Install Windows N edition. No IE. Why do people say IE is part of Windows?
>Install Windows Pi Edition. No desktop. Why do people say the desktop is part of Windows?
>>51998677
Windows and Linux can work without a web browser
Therefore web browsers aren't part of their OS's
Windows can't work without graphics but Linux can
Therefore graphics aren't an essential part of Linux
Is that too hard to understand?
>>51998677
There's a difference between being inherently a part of the system and not being inherently a part.
Who gives a shit about compositing? Gaymen? They shouldn't be using anything but Windows anyway.
X11 has supported network windowing since the 1980s, Windows doesn't support it in 2015 and never will.
Oh right, we're supposed to be excited about Wayland because we can rotate our windows. Fucking ridiculous.
>>51998725
Even Windows can work without graphics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Core
>>51998735
>X11 has supported network windowing
Except that's completely broken and undermined now that every client draws itself, instead of using X drawing calls.
>>51998725
>Windows can't work without graphics
not true though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Core
>>51998478
>>51998577
Aside from Android, ChromeOS and its Freon graphics stack can do HWA compositing just fine today and ChromeOS is based on Gentoo. Calling an OS "Linux" does not mean anything apart from it uses the linux kernel.
>>51998744
>>51998756
Okay.
>>51998719
exactly
IE and the desktop are not part of windows, they are just part of the most popular consumer distribution of windows
>>51998735
You could just run X on top of Wayland if you need network windowing. It's not pretty, but it would work.
>>51998775
>IE and the desktop are not part of windows
just... stop
>>51998782
Nothing about X is pretty in the first place though.
>>51998791
>gnome and KDE are part of linux
>>51998735
Tell me about how you've been using it and how well it performs.
Thought so.
>>51998782
X doesn't even provide networking anymore. see >>51998754
Wayland provides networking support piss easy with shit like VNC
>>51998744
Only for those special versions of Windows. This assumption is not generally true.
>>51998735
>compositing is about gaymen
>not about drawing your windows correctly
>network windowing
>actually is broken. VNC and Windows RDP are better solutions
>compositing is about animations
>not about having indepedent rendering buffers mixed in a final image
Animation is a side effect of compositing tough. It's like arge against graphic equalization because you aren't a basshead
>>51998820
The original assertion was
>Windows can't work without graphics
which is utterly untrue.
>>51998816
>X doesn't even provide networking anymore
Then how the fuck am I running an entire DE from my workplace computer?
>>51998863
X11 forwarding "works" but it's really just pushing bitmaps in a very inefficient way nowadays. VNC and RDP do the same, just far more efficiently.
>>51998863
I'd like to know. Even through LAN speeds were appalling when I tried it.
>>51998834
>drawing your windows correctly
You don't need compositing for that not even gaymen.
>>51998863
I don't know. How are you? The most common way to do that is using something like the VNC server and client.
>>51998896
That's true, but X still makes it awfully hard work these days.
>>51998896
Not, but it's more useful. And you can check if the final image will be rendered properly.
>>51998863
VNC and RDP aren't the same shit like the original network forwading.
>>51998917
GNOME3 programs are the only ones that gave me shit for not using a bloated compositor, was fixable with a little bit of css though. What other problems are you talking about?
>>51998962
Like, the fact that every program can look what every other program do.
>>51998992
How is that a problem?
>>51999032
You can make a keylogger in 5 minutes.
>>51998992
that is possible in every other os
>>51999032
>how is that a problem?
Are you serious?
>>51999064
Keyloggers exist on compositing WMs and wayland too.
>>51999092
Don't run shady shit and you will be fine.
>>51997779
It's funny because you can easily enable triple vsync and tearfree video with intel I presume. You just don't want to spend more than two minutes on it or you need instructions on everything.
>>51999124
yes, a keylogger would work on anything if it could run as root.
the problem is that a keylogger for X does not have to run as root.
>>51999163
>yes, a keylogger would work on anything if it could run as root.
There are new local privilege escalation exploits coming out for pretty much every OS every year.
If you run a malicious program you have to assume it got root anyway.
Not that having root even matters for desktop system, the standard user has access to all the sensitive information, no need root to do any damage there.
>>51999213
>run a malicious program
This is why you only download software from your distros official repo and you don't allow execution in your home folder.
>>51998279
>the only use I do to X is being a fucking giant bitmap dumpster.
That's the only thing a display server should do desu.
And also prevent clients from modifying the windows of other clients.
>>51999139
>enable triple vsync
dat extra lag.
As if X doesn't introduce enough lag anyways.
>>51999319
>And also prevent clients from modifying the windows of other clients.
Run multiple X instances.
Problem solved.
That's a lot easier than migrating everything to wayland, logind, and whatever...
>>51998735
Network windowing is stupid and useless.
Wayland offers much more than rotating windows, and that was just a feature of weston to demonstrate the compositing capabilities of wayland.
>>51999319
I want a compositing engine called Giant Bitmap Dumpster (GBD).
>>51999319
>prevent clients from modifying the windows
Are you telling me wayland won't have gui automation?
>>51999374
that's the compositors job
>>51999343
>Run multiple X instances.
>Problem solved.
Solving problems with X by implementing horrible workaround and hacks like this is the reason why X is a horrible mess now and Wayland exists.
>That's a lot easier than migrating everything to wayland, logind, and whatever...
Yeah, it's less work. But the result is horrible. The goal here is to actually improve the quality of desktop linux in general. Not make it even slower.
>>51999343
>Run multiple X instances.
That's fucking stupid. why would you do that? are you retarded?
>>51999404
>desktop linux in general.
But it doesn't even matter on (personal) desktops.
Only public workstations, which is something only Red Hat cares about.
I don't think such a limited use case warrants such huge invasive changes to Linux.
>>51999343
>multiple X instances
>multiple X instances
>multiple X instances
>problem solved
Confirmed as a troll.
>>51999423
If you learn to read you might find out.
>>51999404
>starting 2 X servers
>horrible workaround and hacks
>>51998992
Use Xpra ( https://xpra.org ) to separate network enabled programs (like your shit browser) from your main desktop. Those programs can run under a different user and will not have access to your keyboard or files. When on the same machine use mmap with rgb - latency is 0.
And remove your DE login from the ADM group -- restrict admin work to a console session.
>>51999444
>performance penalty doesn't matter on personal desktops
>having a piece of software whose maintenance is every year more and more difficult doesn't matter in personal desktops
Are you a muh tiling wm fan? Cause the only people who defend X11 with that arguments are these manchildren.
They prefer to whine instead of contributing to existing muh tiling wm proyects who use Wayland.
>>51999475
Yes, that's a shitty fucking hack to start 2 X servers just to fucking prevent a window from being modified.
What if you wanted every client to be safe from every other client? start an X server for every fucking window?
>>51999401
If something simple like that requires running a whole new compositor. Imagine the chaos all the competing standards will create for everything they will have to reinvent.
>>51999487
What has anything you said have to do with separation of different clients?
>>51999444
>But it doesn't even matter on (personal) desktops.
Sluggish desktop interfaces don't matter to people using personal desktops? On what planet are people not bothered by sluggish UI?
>>51999500
Why would you?
The point is to isolate sessions of different users.
There's absolutely no point in isolating windows from others in the same session.
>>51999512
every DE already has its own compositor. We are at rock bottom. The only way from here is up.
>>51999480
>using a fucking screen for remote forwading to compensate the shit that the display server should do
>>51999475
I'm glad we understand each other
>>51999528
But it's not sluggish at all.
>>51998063
>fast
>light
why are you so opinionated about shit that I use? Continue using whatever the fuck you want
>>51999518
I said this:
The way that X11 does it is plainly wrong and dangerous.
>>51999529
But now clients can still modify other clients, which was what we were trying to solve idiot.
We're not talking about other users.
>>51998358
The Hammerhead ieagle thrust!
>>51999512
Don't worry, I'm sure freedesktop.org will come up with a lot of standards.
They always work out so well...
>>51999547
I use openbox too, but he has a valid point.
>>51999500
Nobody cares about running absolutely everything separately. Seriously this never was an issue before walyand devs/shills started spreading FUD.
I miss the good old Xfree86 days where you had to create your own config file. now any pleb can use linux so I moved back to windows
>>51999512
You mean like how X was? GNOME, KDE, XFCE, MATE, Cinnamon, etc. Those things still exist with wayland. Wayland only removes X from the equation, all the fragmentation is still present.
>>51999534
>compensate the shit that the display server should do
Running network-enabled programs under a different user is advantageous -- denying session keyboard snooping is also a plus. It is worth the trouble to setup Xpra and restrict your general browsing to its little cage.
Also, run your systems with:
iptables -P OUTPUT DROP
>>51999542
It is. X makes hundreds of IPC calls on every render call, needlessly. It forget what the benchmarks were.. but it adds up to something like 5-20ms wasted on each frame as far as i recall. This is one of the major reasons people who worked on X abandoned it to develop Wayland.
>>51997661
>tfw there is people who still doesn't realize that you can solve any problem with X, but you still can solve the mess they have in their code base.
>>51999573
Yes that's what I'm saying, running multiple X servers is fucking stupid.
>>51999554
You're the one that made the retarded point about having every single window run isolated, even when they run in the same session.
No one was talking about that - or at least I hope so
>>51999601
Or simply I could switch to Wayland.
>>51999573
People cared, there was just nothing anyone could do about it before Wayland.
>>51999531
Compositors don't do anything important in the X world.
>>51999602
Not being perfectly efficient does not make it sluggish.
>>51999632
don't you like to have a wallpaper on your desktop?
>>51999600
The superficial fragmentation on X is nothing like what wayland will do.
>>51998390
>http://kdubois.net/?p=1815
>>Surfaceflinger is very tied to the android system and would take a large amount of porting work to run inside of Ubuntu Touch.
>>Surfaceflinger is currently focused on a simplistic z-order based compositing, we needed something that can support the full Unity experience you expect on a desktop. >>The complex “launchers” you use in android are not part of surfaceflinger.
>>Finally, adapting surfaceflinger to use mesa/gbm drivers is a ton of work (and probably not possible). We love the free stack drivers and need to support them for the desktop.
>>51999716
Okey, granted.
>>51999674
Not him, but wallpaper doesn't depend in compositing. Fading transition in other way, yes.
>>51999608
That isn't what you are saying. You only run what is vital on another X server, not everything.
>>51999623
>nothing
There are multiple alternative suggestions in this very thread.
>>51999693
The things you claim will happen could have already happened just as easily with X. There was absolutely nothing keeping developers from making their own protocol and crazy non-standard display server thingy. Why didn't they? Because that's fucking stupid no one would install your crap if it wasn't standardized and used by outside groups.
>>51999674
You don't need a compositor for a wallpaper and I don't care about shadow borders, terminal transparency and fading.
>>51999632
The only realistic advantage is tear free video. Thankfully nvidia proprietary drivers can handle that with ForceFullCompositionPipeline setting.
>>51998735
>network windowing
>>51999693
How the fuck will be more fragmentation with wayland when "mechanism and policy" will be united again?
With compositors supporting server-side decoration you can say goodbye to the mess that GTK and QT apps did in the X11 org in terms of graphic consistency.
>>51999638
no, but creating enough delay to cause frame skipping does.
>>51999909
because than you can't share the mechanism anymore if you don't want the same policy
>>51999924
Examples?
>>51999803
>could have already happened just as easily with X
X standardizes the majority of things you would expect out of a display server. Seriously just look at the wayland specification its basically nothing. The compositor developers are responsible for recreating X functionality and we all know they never work together.
>their own protocol and crazy non-standard display server
There are others though, the only reasons people used X over them was its history, portability between the other OSs and the fact that it could run on shitty drivers.
>>51999940
look at wayland right now,
all desktop environments implement their own display server; mutter, kwin, whatever enlightenment is using
>>51999961
And that is a problem because?
>>51999909
>With compositors supporting server-side decoration you can say goodbye to the mess that GTK and QT apps did in the X11 org in terms of graphic consistency.
What you'll end up with is GTK, QT and dozens of different CSD implementations.
>>51999994
because that's stronger fragmentation?
am i talking to a goldfish here?
>>52000002
>these fucking wire men comics
Considering that actually toolkits like GTK and QT render to Wayland I don't see the problem, really.
>>52000018
I don't understand where is the fragmentation. You can reuse the compositing and window manager solution of one proyect and other? In X11 you can't too. Compositing always was tied to the window managers.
>but muh compton
Compton only supports shadows, basic fading, etc. Yo can't, for example, have shadows who aren't a square or more complex animations in windows.
>>51999961
Not very different from how it was, the only difference is they used X underneath to talk to the OS and now they don't have to. You can always run each widget toolkit and DE independently if that is what you're worried about.
>>52000089
>In X11 you can't too.
What can't I do in X
>Compositing always was tied to the window managers.
No it wasn't.
And a Wayland compositor means much more than what effects some window will have.
For example you need some way to handle input, to handle sessions, window intercommunication, ...
>>52000193
If compositing isn't tied to the window manager
Why the effort to make a Compiz with window manager failed?
Why compton can't implement more advanced animations anyways?
>what is libinput?
>>52000089
>I don't see the problem, really.
Certain programs won't work on certain compositors. The only time I have seen anything similar on X was with CSD and any DE/WM which wasn't gnome but that was the fault of the toolkit.
>>52000248
Because you might want some effects that are tied to the window management.
>>52000251
The only way I think certain programs will not work with compositors will be programs written in some obscure Toolkit who won't support wayland and compositors who doesn't use Xwayland.
You're talking about legacy shit really.
There wiill be more problems trying to programs work between mir and wayland that between wayland compositors
>>52000278
Then "mechanism not policy" at least in X11 is a fucking dream.
>>52000305
>Then "mechanism not policy" at least in X11 is a fucking dream.
How so?
It does exactly that.
>>52000329
Try to drop compiz compositing engine to do compositing in i3 and awesome.
I'm worried about the whole wayland thing because I expect it will make the linux desktop even more fragmented and tricky.
And also it seems like it will encourage different programs to draw their own window controls, something that I really hate because I want to be able to change the order of the close/minimize/maximize buttons, something which is easy with X window managers but seems like it might not be possible with wayland apps.
>>52000357
That has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
It's also wrong.
>>52000385
Then explain me why the fuck is so important to wayland to respect some UNIX buzz phrase.
If toolkits can talk to Wayland protocol, compositors will be able to show them without problem.
>>52000369
Depends of the compositor really.
>>52000413
How about you actually learn what mechanism not policy means before discussing it?
>>52000438
Yeah, it's a good idea, but in a discussion, you should make your point.
Common, let's try to teach me what the fuck does these buzzwords means in X11/Wayland.
>>52000461
Get spoonfed somewhere else, fag.
>>52000305
>legacy shit really
Newer programs will be developed with a specific compositor's way of doing things in mind. The only way to reduce this problem is if the major DE devs decide to work together on a standard of some sorts or use the reference implementation. Do you really think the gnome foundation and its quest to be perceived as an unique "brand" will ever allow that?
>mfw my mobile phone already uses Wayland
when X becomes systemd dependant, maybe you'll understand the real reason for the hate behind the two.
The developers are simply playing important.
inb4 GNU/systemd/linux
>>52000499
>i don't need arge because muh unix philosophy
>>52000526
That's could be a problem if the clients interactuate with the composer in a different way than the wayland protocol. I doubt that any program will do that, except some shit like redshift/f.lux
The rest could be a matter of look and feel.
>>52000570
>muh sysvinit
>muh minimalism
>muh rotting GUI rootkit
>>52000574
I already presented my arguments.
You were just not able to follow them, due to your ignorance.
But whatever, you're right about everything.
Now go away and let the adults talk.
>>52000570
Wayland, as in the compositors that people actually use and have the features that people advocate Wayland with, is already systemd dependent.
>>52000634
That's not how it works anon. You have to prove your arguments if asked for it, regardless how easy it is to find it by doing a search yourself. That's how arguments worked for thousands of years. If you cannot produce proof then your arguments are moot.
>>52000574
>I doubt that any program will do that
Everything not using a GTK/QT will do that.
>The rest could be a matter of look and feel
Which is already bad enough. Even with serious ricing you can never get things not to look out of place.
>>52000673
I don't have to do anything.
If I don't feel like it's worth talking to you about it, I won't.
I already said you "won", it's clear to me that I can't convince you of anything, since you're way too resistant to learn.
>>52000634
You still insist that somehow wayland will ever fragmentate more the Desktop in Linux, because some shit about "mechanism" and "policy" that I don't get because you doesn't try to explain properly in the context of X11.
In fact, could argue that Wayland, since enforces client side rendering and decoration, has more mechanism and policy separation than X anyways. The compositors, being only a mixing board rather than other thing, should not affect anyway how programs work, considering that the mayority of GUI programs in Linux actually uses GTK, QT or render to Cairo anyways.
The only way I think a program could not serve in a other composer is that program or will talk directly to the composer, without the aid of Wayland protocol, or that program being a Wayland compositor itself.
>>52000719
Almost all programs who doesn't render to QT o GTK render to Cairo or directly to Xlib.
That could be easily solved programming server-side decoration.
>>52000790
Ladies and /g/eentomen, the average IT pro, debate skills.
>>52000791
>You still insist that somehow wayland will ever fragmentate more the Desktop in Linux,
Stopped reading there.
You're confusing me with someone else.
I objected to calling mechanism, not policy in X11 being called a "dream".
I have never made any point about it being a good design philosophy for a display server.
>>52000830
What the fuck are you discussing anyways?
>>52000855
Mostly that you should learn what mechanism not policy is before trying to discuss it.
>>52000886
Perhaps that is true, but that doesn't aid you to debate or arge something.
Do you get butthurt because I called it a "UNIX buzz phrase"?
>>52000920
>but that doesn't aid you to debate or arge something.
People knowing what they're talking about would help a lot actually.
>>52000978
People explaining they points actually helps a lot too.
>>52001001
No, that destroys any technical discussion - when you have to start from fucking zero and explain every little thing.
It's very distracting, bores the people who aren't retards, and easily devolves into discussing some minor inaccuracy in some ad hoc explanation.
>>52001050
That's bad form actually. If you cared to explain why I was supposely wrong, I even could ended give you the reason anyways.
Instead, you simply dismissed my argument and stated an accusation, an acussation backed only in the force of your words.
If I can't learn and exchange different, but well developed ideas, in the basis that's very "distracting" what's the point of discussing anyways?
That's the average IT pro way of solve discussions, and isn't a good one.
>>52001149
>That's bad form actually.
This isn't the high school debate club.
>what's the point of discussing anyways?
It's definitely not teaching every random guy the very basics of the topic that is discussed.
Teaching requires effort to do right and it's not the reason I come here.
>>52001149
That's the point though. He doesn't want you to learn. He wants to sit on his superior information because he has nothing else in life.
>>52001230
>posting links is hard
Just fuck off to your project mailing list or somewhere morons like you can be more easily ignored.
>>52001256
No, I want him to learn.
I just don't want to teach him.
There are plenty of places where he could learn, that explain everything much more accurate and better articulated than I could do in passing in a random post.
>>52001275
What's the point of linking to a google search result page?
I don't consider Wayland even remotely stable yet. It glitches on Fedora 23 out the ass, though that may just be due to Fedora being shit.
I'll stick with Xorg for now.
>>52001230
>This isn't the high school debate club.
That's isn't a excuse anyways.
Because you're in you house isn't correct to left the food and garbabe over all the place?
>It's definitely not teaching every random guy the very basics of the topic that is discussed.
Teaching requires effort to do right and it's not the reason I come here.
Then you should don't discuss nothing at all. In all discussions, you always will get with someone who doesn't have the sufficient information, or simply appears to do that because holds a different view anyways.
You could made me admit I was wrong, but now, you made an ass of yourself.
>>52001301
That's just an awful metaphor.
Here's a better one, should a prof start his lecture by explaining how to read?
>you always will get with someone who doesn't have the sufficient information
That depends. If you don't know some small random fact, that's okay. But if you're showing ignorance about the very basics of what's being discussed, then I won't bother.
Why is X11 forwarding so unbearably slow? Why is it so difficult to get this to be a working feature?
>>52001366
>Here's a better one, should a prof start his lecture by explaining how to read?
What the fucking analogy is that?
>
That depends. If you don't know some small random fact, that's okay. But if you're showing ignorance about the very basics of what's being discussed, then I won't bother.
Well, don't bother. Don't expect to don't being called for saying that someone is an idiot and don't justify yourself.
>>52001384
Because is X11
/thread.
>>52001386
Do I also have to teach you English?
It's getting harder and harder to understand you.
>>52001422
O simplemente podríamos discutir en español.
Considerando que sabes tanto, creo que no se te hará ningún problema entenderme.
What the hell is going on? Some dude is whining because he doesn't want to coherently explain his argument?
>>52001459
Das hilft mir auch nicht.
Wie wär's wenn du einfach ein bißchen Zeit in deine Posts steckst, so dass andere Leute sie verstehen können?
>>52001488
E se melhor falamos coreano?
>>52001528
We're not on int or kdramastars.
