Has anyone tried building Wayland for Slackware? I'd love to try it, but setting it up seems like a lot of work. If you tried replacing X with Wayland, I'd love to hear about your mileage

I'm curious, I've watched a youtube video of the main developer talking about Wayland and X and I may give it a try.

I will switch if and when Pat decides to ship it in a new Slackware edition.

4 members found this post helpful.

I'm missing the "I don't care" option

so much of the stuff I use is X-only that I really don't even want to think about it.

3 members found this post helpful.

I have a feeling that this is a great idea, and if it is implemented well, it's going to make Unix/Linux far more stable and better performing than it already is. No point in being a Luddite just because you can.

What he said. ^^^^^^^^^^

1 members found this post helpful.

I am not switching any time soon, or perhaps ever.

They have to first convince me that there is a benefit to switching, and that all programs I run are supported.

3 members found this post helpful.

Whell, from what I have understood and I may be wrong there will be some kind of emulation that will extend the support to those programs that doesn't natively support Wayland but only X

Some of my friends are very, *very* enthusiastic about Wayland, and it sounds like the problems Wayland solves (mostly having to do with minor defects in high-performance video playback) are important to them.

They're not important to me. X11 works great for everything I need it to do, and giving up X11's network transparency for the RDP-like capability Wayland may or may not implement someday is not progress.

That having been said, aside from my baseline mistrust of any new code (new code is buggy code!) and reluctance to lose network transparency, I don't have anything *against* Wayland. If a time comes when it is robust, works well with fvwm, and allows me to use firefox, xfig, etc from a different computer without RDP-like loss of performance, I'll use it just as readily as X11.

To me, "Wayland" means "heroin-addicted singer of Stone Temple Pilots." That's "Weiland," really, but Wayland needs to be used by something that I use before it has more of a connotation than that. I'll wait for Pat to present it to me, and I'm in no hurry whatsoever. Either this solution or a pure X11 solution will find a way to stink. Heck, by the time it's in wide deployment, Wayland probably won't work on my video card for lack of 4D time-travel compositing.

1 members found this post helpful.

this aint the most improving thing in wayland.
The big difference between wayland and X is the rendering of the GPU.
where X needs seperate software, like Mutter for gnome, probably something for KDE aswell.
Wayland is directly doing this, meaning more smoother rendering.

This is also the reason why KDE, Enlightment, MATE, gnome are starting to port to wayland.

I can see how "smoother rendering" could be important to people who demand flawless video playback, and I wish them luck.

I'm just not one of those people. Computers, for me, are for doing other things. So I'm likely to hold on to X11 for a while.

2 members found this post helpful.

Thirded.

1. Its taken me decades to figure out X
2. X works.
3. X with Nvidia blob works great.
4. Wayland can suck my left testicle.

Well, maybe that last one is a bit over the top. I just don't see the supposed improvements from the hype. You are still going to need some sort of GPU hardware driver for optimal performance. You will still need all sorts of added software. You will still need X. Given the lots of Wayland devs are also X.org devs, I suspect any Wayland improvements will get ported to X.

what if wayland falls flat and mir shines, what then?

1 members found this post helpful.