Xorg development effort slowing in favour of Wayland
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
By 'Xwayland' you mean emulating Xorg on top of wayland? So, same issues/vulnerabilities as before, but with few extra bugs added.
As I already noted few pages before: until NVIDIA ports the driver configuration to wayland protocol and achieves feature parity, I don't see this going anywhere.
And I say this not because I like NVIDIA, but because they are the largest GPU vendor at least in EU. You expect them to drop hundreds of features?
Until you show me evidence that features they've used "xorg.conf" for, 20 years ago or more, are supported by wayland or weston or whatever, then I will believe you wayland's ready.
Otherwise, it's FUD. Slackware was not RedHat derivative, last I checked. And Xorg is still used on few non-linux systems also, none of which currently depend on RedHat's deprecation policy.
There is no "Wayland Drivers" difference from X.ORG. Where Wayland needs a driver, they use the SAME EXACT DRIVER as X.Org. This is the same desktop team, and there was no reason for them to reinvent EVERYTHING: so they did not. FYI: they have also not required ANYONE to convert form X.Org to Wayland. They want to make it enticing, but are not forcing the issue. If someone is forcing you, look to your distribution maintainers: although if they are I bet they have GOOD reasons!
Expansion Options
PCI Support 1
PCIe x1 Gen 2.x 0
PCIe x4 Gen 2.x 0
PCIe x8 Gen 2.x 0
PCIe x16 Gen 2.x 0
is that the slot does not provide PCIe capability at all - the only pcie anywhere on this machine is for the SATA ports.
Whereas I know that cards identified as PCI-X-capable do work in this slot - I have a dual-port Intel 1GB ethernet in it as I type.
And yes I paid the "antique" tax for that card. Paying an extra $US100 or so to have something working out of the box is cheaper than spending time on something current that doesn't work.
So I will wait to hear if anyone (ZhaoLin1457?) can confirm that the MATROX MGI PH-P256PDIF I found on E-Bay, or some other PCI-X-capable graphics card, satisfies the hardware requirements for wayland.
And there is another interesting thing :
On my regular slackware64 system which I run on this machine, I run Xorg built with mesa (the one which comes with Xorg) in place of opengl, and the build of mesa has this in mesa/mesa/builddir/meson-logs/meson-log.txt
Code:
OpenGL: yes (ES1: yes ES2: yes)
and in Xorg.0.log it happily reports
Code:
[2078735.079] (II) intel(0): SNA initialized with Alviso (gen3) backend
[ ... [
[2078735.093] (II) intel(0): [DRI2] Setup complete
[2078735.093] (II) intel(0): [DRI2] DRI driver: i915
[2078735.093] (II) intel(0): [DRI2] VDPAU driver: va_gl
[2078735.093] (II) intel(0): direct rendering: DRI2 enabled
[ ... ]
[2078735.096] (II) Initializing extension GLX
[2078735.222] (II) AIGLX: Loaded and initialized i915
[2078735.222] (II) GLX: Initialized DRI2 GL provider for screen 0
[2078735.222] (II) Initializing extension XFree86-VidModeExtension
[2078735.222] (II) Initializing extension XFree86-DGA
[2078735.222] (II) Initializing extension XFree86-DRI
[2078735.222] (II) Initializing extension DRI2
Seeing that that version of Xorg mesa can do all of the above with the on-board 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller, (and gives quite adequate acceleration and so on for my "old-fashioned" editing and browsing), it seems a bit feeble of current KDE/Plasma/wayland that it cannot even operate at all with this card. Oh well.
If someone is forcing you, look to your distribution maintainers: although if they are I bet they have GOOD reasons!
Hell no, I don't look at them, and they don't look at me for GOOD reason. They aren't my prison guards.
And why don't you tell yomama where to look, you'll probably have more chance of success.
Hell no, I don't look at them, and they don't look at me for GOOD reason. They aren't my prison guards.
And why don't you tell yomama where to look, you'll probably have more chance of success.
You have been very rude, very weird. The ONLY Distribution you claim to use is Slackware, which doe snot use Wayland by default yet: and may never. If you have a valid point, make it instead of throwing pointless insults.
You have been very rude, very weird. The ONLY Distribution you claim to use is Slackware, which doe snot use Wayland by default yet: and may never. If you have a valid point, make it instead of throwing pointless insults.
You started it by telling me to look at maintainers, you think I would even be here if I didn't like what they do?
They're fine, very open about what they do. Not at all like those few users I will not name, who don't even use the distro but post here with a corporate agenda.
I'm sorry, if that makes any difference to you, guy. I'm just nervous about some other stuff.
It certainly appears this is a PCI-X system with no PCI-E support. I had only ever seen PCI-X in server boards, but this being a "workstation" machine that makes sense; I am sure you are correct about needing a PCI-X card. PCI-X will be a lot faster than PCI but again i have only seen HBAs and NICs use it; never seen a video card. PCI-X is one of those industry dead ends.
I am not one to ever tell someone to give up on a piece of hardware that has remained useful for them; but the sad truth is that you are in an esoteric corner here where you are not going to find a lot people who can offer much experience or see much testing upstream. Drivers should hopefully be somewhat bus agnostic so as long as a PCI or AGP version of whatever you chose existed you might be successful but even that stuff is pretty old at this part as far as Wayland's targets are concerned.
It is a lot better than it once was but life on Linux when you get outside the mainstream in terms of hardware can still be pretty tough at times.
You have been very rude, very weird. The ONLY Distribution you claim to use is Slackware, which doe snot use Wayland by default yet: and may never. If you have a valid point, make it instead of throwing pointless insults.
Valid points are usually based on facts. Many of elcore's concerns are rooted in social pressures from outside the Slackware community that you are clearly oblivious too. His crankiness doesn't change that there are real attempts to bully people into adopting this or that project/subsystem. A little empathy would do you good here.
Some of your claims are weak on the factual accuracy side. As much as I'd like to correct every dumb thing you've said on this thread I doubt you would interpret refutation as anything other than an invitation to converse. I could easily point out how much pain the nvidia drivers have caused people who want to switch to wayland but you already seem convinced that it doesn't make a difference... So why bother?
Thank-you ZhaoLin1457 for your diagnosis of my problem and other very informative comments. Which have got me thinking - always dangerous And I have ended up with a couple more questions :
1. You refer to hardware requirements for Wayland compositors, and strangely that piece of text in your comment is underlined as though it is a clickable URL, but it isn't - so I googled "hardware requirements for wayland compositor" - and found - lots of pages, *none* of which stated hardware requirements, only software package support and dependencies! So - what are they? and where are they stated?
I would also like clarification before I waste any time trying wayland on my 2011 Elitebook.
Debian and Arch wikis claim that "wayland" requires either GBM or ESLStreams. What does that imply about hardware OpenGL version support or Mesa version?
On the other hand wayland's own homepage only says Wayland uses EGL and that Weston (which no one proposes to use as his compositor these days?) uses "OpenGL ES to render". OpenGL ES = old name for EGL? "The acronym EGL is an initialism, which starting from EGL version 1.2 refers to Khronos Native Platform Graphics Interface.[3] Prior to version 1.2, the name of the EGL specification was OpenGL ES Native Platform Graphics Interface." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGL_(API)
wlroots's page only mention of hardware is forget about NVidia except by use of Nouveau.
Think maybe I'll continue to bury my head in the sand and play around with Plan 9. This is all too complicated.
"wayland" requires either GBM or ESLStreams. What does that imply about hardware OpenGL version support or Mesa version?
I continued my experiments on my Intel Graphics card but, rather than running some very high-level script such as startkwayland, purely for dagnostic purposes, I tried in turn running each of the following directly from the command line
. Xwayland
. labwc (which I built from SBo)
Firstly, the Xwayland man pages says that it requires either GBM or EGLstreams, and will try each, unless you force it to use only one with the command-line option
Code:
-eglstream
Use EGLStream backend for NVidia GPUs. If Xwayland was compiled with EGLStream support,
this option will instruct Xwayland to try that backend first,
then fallback to the GBM backend if EGLStream is not supported by the Wayland server.
Without this option, Xwayland tries the GBM backend first, and fallback to EGLStream
if GBM is not usable.
From this, I deduce that eglstreams is nvidia-specific and, for non-nvidia, GBM is mandatory. I could not find any information on whether GBM has hardware dependencies or how it can be made to be available. I did find this wonderful piece of waffle-gab in https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquesti...s_the_gbm_api/ :
Code:
For example, the Wayland compositor Weston does its rendering using OpenGL ES 2, which it initializes by calling EGL. Since the server runs on the "bare KMS driver", it uses the EGL DRM platform, which could really be called the GBM platform, since it relies on the Mesa GBM interface.
my experiments :
running Xwayland results in
Code:
glamor: No eglstream capable devices found
So I assume it did try for GBM and did not find that and then tried eglstreams and didn't find that either.
running labwc results in
Code:
libEGL fatal: did not find extension DRI_Mesa version 1
This is a bit more interesting, and googling for this message reveals numerous cases. It appears that current versions of mesa (since mesa-22 ?) omit whatever DRI_Mesa version 1 is, (presumably some kind of dri-enabled libxxxx.so, I could not find the actual name stated anywhere) ref e.g. https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...423/page2.html
This raises the fascinating question of whether I might persuade labwc to start on my Intel 82945G/GZ card by finding an sufficiently *old* version of mesa - but knowing the vast number of dependencies which mesa has on the OS, that would require starting afresh with some older slackware, probably 14.2?? or some early-incarnation-of-slackware-15-current, if such a slackware had labwc and so on.
I ran out of time to find out ...
I will try wayland again in ten years time.
Cheers, John
Last edited by John Lumby; 03-21-2024 at 09:42 AM.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,099
Rep:
FWIW:
Quote:
SDL Developers Weigh Reverting Wayland Over X11 For SDL 3.0
By Michael Larabel. 26 March 2024.
With the SDL library that's widely-used by cross-platform games with the current SDL 3.0 development code it prefers Wayland over X11, but a new pull request would temporarily revert that on the basis of the Wayland ecosystem still not being up to par.........
I read some if it and was struck by how qualitative all the arguments were. this protocol is better than that one, this mechanism is worse than that one. Almost nothing quantitative, unless you consider "your application will stall forever" to be such.
Which raises the question in my mind? How does one measure/score native wayland versus Xwayland versus Xorg+mesa? I am not suggesting that numbers tell the complete story, but it seems they should be at least part of it. I know of glxgears. Anything else?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
