• cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    5 months ago

    With Wayland, programs still can’t restore their window position or size. It sure would be nice if they could get basic functionality working.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      5 months ago

      Wayland is still incomplete, but that is besides the point I was making. X is still not dead, even living within XWayland, within Wayland. X11 is just one implementation of the X Protocol and XWayland is a new implementation.

      Wayland itself is functional and working, just not 100% compatible to X11. The same could be said about X11, it would be nice if they could get some basic functionality working right; but they can’t, and that is why we need to replace it with something more modern and better. I think Wayland is working on a solution for restoring window position and size.

      When X was created, there was no compatibility needed. Wayland on the other hand is in a different position, where it needs to innovate, make it more secure and keep as much as possible compatibility to X11, DEs and window managers. It’s just unfair to just say Wayland would not have basic functionality working. It also depends on the desktop environments and GNOME is often to blame for.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        5 months ago

        It will never be compatible with X because they are different designs. X relies on a central program (server) that accepts commands from programs. It is also a mess as it was built during the 80s for 80s hardware. It was expanded over time but you can only stretch the arch so far.

        Wayland doesn’t have a server. You desktop talks to the hardware and then the desktop accepts connections from apps.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          That does not seem to be a stray and yes there’s definitely reasons to take potshots at Gnome. They still don’t support server-side decorations. Everyone is absolutely fine with them not wanting to use them in their own apps, have them draw window decorations themselves, and every other DE lets gnome apps do exactly that, but Gnome is steadfastly and pointlessly refusing to draw decorations for apps which don’t want to draw their own decorations. It’d be like a hundred straight-forward lines of code for them.

          And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to breakage you have to expect when running Gnome.

          • TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I generally speaking like most of the other things you say on lemmy, so I’m just gonna agree to disagree and move on. Have a nice day

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      ELI5: what does this mean for the end user? Is there any simple test I can do with both to see this?

      • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        it means that you have to manually reposition every single window, every single time. for any and all apps, by design

        • qpsLCV5@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          just another reason to use tiling window managers ;) at least mine opens my windows in the same workspace on the same output every time, if i configure it to