What compositing managers does /g/ use? Does anything even exist besides compton and xcompgmgr?
wayland
>>53937452
Compton
>>53937559
Do you like buggy shit?
>>53937452
there's always cairo-compmgr
>>53937452
what desktop eviroment is in the picture?
>>53937934
Openbox IIRC
Gala.
>>53937452
i've use compton, but right now i just use whatever the hell comes default with xfce4
>>53937952
You fags are fucking wizards, how do you even make openbox look like that?
>>53938060
b-by opening a few .rc in any text editor?
Compiz
Is the default in best distro Ubuntu
>>53937452
I use compton.
>>53937452
I never use a compositor normally because xf86-video-intel has built-in vsync and that's all I would want a compositor for. But there's a weird glitch on my system where fullscreen programs will have terrible graphical bugs unless a compositor is running, so if I need a fullscreen program, I start Compton with all the rice options disabled.
>>53937559
I assume you mean Weston.
>>53937602
Weston/Wayland aren't buggy. Have you used them?
Easton?
>>53938528
I use kwin with Xfce. It also allows me to use krunner.
>>53938544
kek´d
>>53939065
krunner doesn't like working alone desu?
>>53937452
Compton is nice, but it acts retarded with Arch/Fluxbox, so I use Cairo. It's nice too, but I'd prefer Compton.
Compiz is pretty much dying, if it's not already dead. It still works for now, but I wouldn't bother with it if you aren't already.
Conky is something else that can really make your desktop shine if you don't mind putting a little work into it.
>>53939770
a nice lemonbar never hurt anybody either
also what kind of issues does fluxbox have with compton? I was thinking of trying out fluxbox for a while but I probably won't stick around if I can't get my crappy transparency blur eye candy fix. Or can you do that with cairo?
>>53940432
I'm really unsure whether it's an issue with Arch, Fluxbox, or both, but basically when it's launched mouse input is killed, and the keyboard input is wonky too. Google didn't turn up much, and I've not been able to figure it out on my own, albeit I didn't really bother trying very hard.
I decided to try Cairo to see if it did the same thing. It didn't, and I just decided to stick with it instead for now. I've been perfectly satisfied with it so far, and haven't felt motivated to try to get Compton working yet.
Give it a shot though. You may not have the same problem. Based on my Googling no one else seems to be having it. It could be my hardware that's to blame. It's a HP Pavilion g7 series. It never was the greatest laptop, but I've never really had any other issues with it before this either.
compton, unagi, ortle, compiz.
I use compton with the minimal xrender backend, it only handles shadow and transparency, I use the proprietary NVIDIA driver do handle vsync/tearing.
>>53937559
wayland is a protocol you fucktard.
Instead of a separate wm, hotkey daemon, screenshot manager, clipboard manager, compositor, etc., everything is build into to compositor. Like you can imagine this makes portable software that falls under these and many other categories locked into one compositor, and will kill desktop customization.
>>53941183
It's absolutely retarded. It's all in the name of security but it's been proven that without something like selinux on top of it, it's absolutely useless and protects against nothing. This is going to basically kill anything that isn't a full-fledged DE. X needs to go, but Wayland can't replace it.
>>53941141
fuck that is a nice looking desktop, 10/10 holy shit i want to ctrl+v it
>>53941141
hey senpai what panel is that
>>53941141
What the fuck is that distro?
>>53941877
CRUX
>>53941377
Lemonbar
>>53937452
my eyes, jesus that is ugly
>unagi
>compiz
>kwin
>xfwm4
>metacity
>cairo-compmgr
>metisse
>mutter
>e16,e17
These are just the ones I could think of off the top of my head OP
>>53937988
How's that screen-tearing working out for you, anon?
>>53940432
Forgot to say, Cairo does offer true transparency. You should be able to at least get similar results from it that you expect from Compton.
>>53942004
I was more talking about standalone compositing managers that can act on top of other WMs but sure.
>>53942576
It's worth trying once, at least.
>>53942601
Well you could always try unagi, if you really want to be that special snowflake guy. It even has neat effects like expose clone
>>53942625
ngl I am a fan of the whole expose thing. I think it looks nice and let's me switch between windows faster than alt tabbing through them all. That's like half the reason I keep coming back to GNOME.
>>53941929
How do you make the nvidia driver handle vsync?
>>53942649
There's a few different things you can put in your xorg.conf to do it. I think the most reliable method is this but I think the arch wiki has more info on this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo2jsZVXxYg
Trigger warning: asians
>>53937452
>Dropbox on GNU/Linux
Do you hate freedom?
You get so close to freedom then you just cuck everything up?
>>53942678
>that windows-tier desktop
closed
xfwm4, though some programs are buggy with compositing, such as Spotify. I had to write a script to turn compositing off when it starts and back on when the process dies.
>>53941141
>>>/reddit/
>>53942706
you don't even have to watch the video, just read the description.
>>53942678
Thank you anon
>>53941248
>X needs to go, but Wayland can't replace it.
Xenocara exists. It solves much of the problems with X, without the need to completely abandon X. Sure, it still has much room for improvement, but it's a more appealing, and competent solution than the shit that is Wayland. It boggles my mind why the Linux community, and the other BSDs (even more so), haven't adopted it. It was made available for upstream use to begin with, so not doing so is just plain retarded.
>>53942964
I can't find hardly any information beyond the extremely basic about it even on its own website.
>>53942993
http://www.openbsd.org/papers/fosdem07-xenocara.pdf
>>53943216
There we go. Thanks, anon.
>>53941248
>it's been proven that [...] it's absolutely useless
By whom and where?
Real-world problem 1: X is a free-for-all where clients can snoop on each other if they feel like it. Wayland solves in by baking in client isolation right form the start.
I don't know how you think computer security works, but let me tell you its not through panaceas. You build layers of security, plugging the most obvious holes (i.e. X11) because you are only as strong as your weakest link.
What makes you assume there will never be a compositor agnostic privileged API for screenshot programs and the like?
>>53943591
>Wayland solces it by baking in client isolation right from the start.
In theory, yes. Client isolation is important for security. But Wayland's current implementation just doesn't work. Wayland is just as vulnerable to snooping as X. There's even a proof of concept keylogger that doesn't need any special permissions.
https://github.com/MaartenBaert/wayland-keylogger
>What makes you assume there will never be a compositor agnostic privileged API for screenshot programs and the like?
I hope to all that is holy that there will be a privileged API for hotkey daemons, screenshot tools, and accessibility utilities, but I don't see that in the near future for Wayland.
>>53943696
>Wayland is just as vulnerable to snooping as X. There's even a proof of concept keylogger that doesn't need any special permissions.
That keylogger *does not* demonstrate that a Wayland client is vulnerable to snooping in the same way as an X client. It doesn't even demonstrate a flaw in the Wayland protocol, preventing that hack is not in scope at all, and you can do much more interesting things than simply keylog.
Wayland enables secure app sandboxing (remember: layers), while X does not. GNOME is already developing sandboxed apps built around Wayland, SELinux, cgroups, etc.
https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/SandboxedApps
>>53943840
Did I say that it was vulnerable in the same way? No. I even said that it was only vulnerable without something like SELinux. I'm just saying that Wayland isn't a magic bullet that will solve our problems like some people make it out to be.
>>53943591
wayland un-solves several problems by giving an enormous amount of control to compositors and destroying compatibility with shitloads of software that will never be ported because GNOME is the most unprofessional, anti-user, anti-developer "organization" on the planet
with X, everything had a common abstraction and compatibility was ez. with wayland, the major abstraction is now fragmented. and linux-only. X even works on windows, wayland...
now we NEED cross-platform UI toolkits instead of a cross platform display server
>BUT I WANTED TEARING FREE SPINNAN CUBES
what was wrong with a secure X-compatible X-alike? nothing
>SPINNAN CUBES
>>53943864
>Did I say that it was vulnerable in the same way?
You said it was "useless" and "doesn't work".
>I'm just saying that Wayland isn't a magic bullet that will solve our problems like some people make it out to be.
Those people are uniformed. There's no panacea in security. The important thing is that Wayland is built with security in mind, X wasn't. You can effectively use a Wayland compositor in building a more secure system.
>>53943954
>You said it was "useless" and "doesn't work".
Yes, without something like SELinux, which most people don't even have enabled. All the security in the world doesn't matter if your users are absolute retards. Is Wayland itself secure? Yes. But not the way these people are going to use it. They should know that instead of marching in blindly. And I should have mentioned that the security issue wasn't in wayland itself in my first post.
>You can effectively use a Wayland compositor in building a more secure system.
Agreed.
>>53943954
Anything that requires the configuration nightmare of selinux might as well not work. Desktop users can't manage selinux. Server users can barely manage selinux. I thought linux was supposed to get easier over time, not slowly become more complicated than windows?
>redhat
>>53943924
It's hard to take anything you've written seriously because it's a pile of vague shit-flinging and strawmen so I'll respond to only one point.
>what was wrong with a secure X-compatible X-alike? nothing
Here's a clue: to make X secure you need to break compatibility. You can call it X12... or Wayland. You choose.
>>53944045
You make X secure and break compatibility a little
Or you introduce wayland, which is a compositor protocol instead of a server with extensions, and not only break compatibility, but introduce a new paradigm which creates a development community and software ecosystem incompatible with the old one, and make desktop linux even less feasible. Then you top that off by making the security linux-only, while the protocol itself is barely even ported to BSD.
While that's happening, professional users are migrating all their workstations to windows because it has one mature compositor that fucking works and is compatible with previous programs. They used to like linux because it had one fucking display server, but not anymore.
>>53944088
you don't get it
the point is to break legacy compatibility very severely and force everyone to migrate to what redhat ships
when everyone is using systemd+wayland+gnome, everyone is just using redhat with a different package manager and logo. now redhat can expand their market into providing support for linux distros that are basically redhat with a different package manager and logo.
>>53944088
>You make X secure and break compatibility a little
How? Have you worked on this?
>incompatible with the old one
"Break compatibility a little" == "incompatible with the old one"
>While that's happening, professional users are migrating all their workstations to windows
Do you have data on this?
>>53939065
Dope. I should try that
>>53939640
No is does not but you can just install most of the kde framework
xfwm4 is fine for me
>>53937452
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell tools and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
There are many users run a modified version of the GNU system routinely, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU that is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There truly is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
>>53947188
I'm terribly sorry for interjecting another moment, but what I just told you is GNU/Linux is, in fact, just Linux, or as I've just now taken to calling it, Just.Linux. Linux apparently does happen to be a whole operating system unto itself and comprises a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Most computer users who run the entire Linux system every day already realize it. Through a peculiar turn of events, I was misled into calling the system "GNU/Linux", and until now, I was unaware that it is basically the Linux system, developed by the Linux project.
There really isn't a GNU/Linux, and I really wasn't using it; it is an extraneous misrepresentation of the system that's being used. Linux is the operating system: the entire system made useful by its included corelibs, shell utilities, and other vital system components. The kernel is already an integral part of the Linux operating system, never confined useless by itself; it functions coherently within the context of the complete Linux operating system. Linux is never used in combination with GNU accessories: the whole system is basically Linux without any GNU added, or Just.Linux. All the so-called "GNU/Linux" distributions are really distributions of Linux.
>>53937452
KDE/Wayland master race
I want a compositing manager that has more animations than fucking fading and doesn't shit itself on AMD GPUs
Can someone do that, please
I'm really waiting here.
>>53937452
Use compton, personally.
>>53949370
this so much
can't believe it hasn't been done yet.
>>53950582
unagi
>>53950654
Are you screwing with me or are you for real
Where does Mir fall?
>>53949370
compiz or kwin
>>53937452
>GNOME Shell/Mutter
>Cinnamon/Muffin
>kwin
>xfwm4
>>53941183
Is there any hope?
>>53938060
It's not nearly as hard as it looks and it's not just Openbox chances are its a panel like tint2 but 90% of this shit is just CSS and changing some fonts. Not hard at all.
>>53957510
I've never used OpenBox, but in Fluxbox everything is changed through editing simple text files. Even easier than writing CSS really.
I know OpenBox isn't the same thing exactly, but I always thought it was supposed to be very similar to Fluxbox at least.
