Wayland and BunsenLabs

PackRat · 2024-03-14 12:24:04

brontosaurusrex wrote:

^ I thought GTK+ is is gimp related?
https://people.redhat.com/mclasen/Useni … s/x29.html

Yes, typo on my part. They used GTK (Which was called Gimp Tool Kit at the time). They didn't create it.

Miguel de Icaza (one of the original gnome creators) has ties to many Linux projects; including GTK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Icaza

Last edited by PackRat (2024-03-14 12:27:23)

hhh · 2024-03-14 14:29:09

PackRat wrote:

Miguel de Icaza (one of the original gnome creators) has ties to many Linux projects; including GTK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Icaza

Another typo, I think, that wiki link makes no mention of GTK. de Icaza started GNOME. GTK was Peter Mattis...

https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/13/ … s_x_gnome/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTK#History

In other Wayland WM news, here's niri...

https://github.com/YaLTeR/niri/releases/tag/v0.1.0

And here's miracle-wm...

https://github.com/mattkae/miracle-wm

I'm going to try and build miracle-wm from source now. I'm still using Ubuntu, but I don't have snap installed and don't really want to install it, it was a bit of a pain to completely remove.

-edit- Fixed the miracle-wm link. No go on building it, it depends on some dev packages that are only in noble, and I'm running mantic. libmiral-dev installed no problem (it's available in mantic), but gi1.2-glib-2.0-dev is going to break things and I don't even know if there are more dependencies needed.

Last edited by hhh (2024-03-14 14:52:04)

hhh · 2024-03-17 00:42:50

Installed miracle-wm via snap, I'm finding it challenging...

https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic … 47#p132847

johnraff · 2024-03-28 05:29:55

@malm has posted an interesting progress report on labwc:
https://github.com/johanmalm/labwc-0.8. … /story.txt

grubernd · 2024-04-09 11:57:32

johnraff wrote:

A small room at the back of the Lab, occasional sounds of breaking glass...
A name on the door? How about BeakerLand?

This.

As a user I care about the OS not getting in my way on my daily drivers.

As a curious dude I like to tinker with all kinds of stuff during the off season, so to speak. Also there is enough old and/or semi-important hardware in this household that allows to just run some machine with something more esoteric.

Testing can be done - but not on a predictable schedule.

Other than that "classic" BL is pretty much perfect from where I stand - and my Ansible playbooks take care of the rest. The parts that adapt to either Boron or Beryllium (still have two of those running, don't ask) are really tiny compared to the rest.

Colonel Panic · 2024-04-19 18:26:52

Dedo has published an unfavourable report about Wayland on his website;

https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/wayland-2024.html

From what he's said it looks like XOrg is still the better option. Anyone got any thoughts on this please?

kozimodo · 2024-04-20 00:18:42

I’ve been using Wayland with Gnome for a couple of years now. It may be that x11 performance is better than Wayland but the difference must be fairly marginal as it all works well enough for me. I’m using mostly pretty old hardware with onboard graphics. Basically no complaints from me.

hhh · 2024-04-20 00:27:08

Colonel Panic wrote:

Dedo has published an unfavourable report about Wayland on his website;
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/wayland-2024.html
From what he's said it looks like XOrg is still the better option. Anyone got any thoughts on this please?

This is completely up to the user's hardware, OS/DE and choice of apps, in my opinion.

I'm using GNOME and Hyprland Wayland sessions on Ubuntu Noble beta currently, and both are working flawlessly for me, and getting better all the time as upgrades continue to come in for the upcoming release of Noble later this month (GNOME session) and as Hyprland develops (git, built from source).

The main advantage of Wayland on my low-end Intel integrated graphics system is screen tearing, which is absolutely eliminated on Wayland but continues to persist on Xorg no matter how much I monkey with xorg.conf (more accurately, xorg.conf.d/20-intel.conf).

That said, Wayland development is ramping up exponentially, so running it on Debian Bookworm/BunsenLabs Boron is not going to give you the best results in terms of app compatibility and performance, again IMO.

As to Dedo's specific post...

He's running Wayland on KDE Plasma 6, which had a buggy release outside of the Wayland issues and only just started introducing a Wayland session by default, and it has a whole host of known issues...

https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Waylan … ant_Issues

I think it's disingenuous to make an assesment of the current state of Wayland using recently released Plasma 6. GNOME is a better session to install to test Wayland, as they've been using it as their default for longer and have been developing Wayland-native apps for longer.

Also, Dodo doesn't know what he's talking about in general. ...

https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/bun … erium.html

BTW, I tested the KDE Neon Plasma 6 live ISO that Dedo mentions, I thought it sucked as well. But to say that "KDE/Plasma is a cornerstone of Linux" so Wayland sucks because it sucks on Plasma for him ATM, after only 7 hours of usage... that sounds like clickbait to me, and I'm sorry I responded to it here!

Dedoimedo wrote:

Furthermore, I tested with Plasma 6 on top of KDE neon. Again, in part, the results here reflect the behavior of the KDE ecosystem as much as Wayland. Then, over the past decade, I've done 10s of similar tests, including all sorts of platforms, graphics and distros, including the entire gamut of desktop environments. The findings were often very similar, which gives me confidence that what I have here is indicative of the broader ecosystem. Furthermore, it doesn't matter. The findings were very similar on both machines. On top of that, KDE/Plasma is a cornerstone of Linux, and if things don't work there, then the problems cannot be sidelined or ignored.

This paragraph is a hot mess, take his opinions with more than a grain of salt.

hhh · 2024-04-20 01:16:38

hhh wrote:

That said, Wayland development is ramping up exponentially, so running it on Debian Bookworm/BunsenLabs Boron is not going to give you the best results in terms of app compatibility and performance, again IMO.

I should note that GNOME running Wayland has been the default session on Debian since Buster. Again, Dedo is way off the mark with this comment...

Dedoimedo wrote:

This means I will still keep using X11 on my systems (and most serious distros do the same thing)

Yes... Debian, Ubuntu, RedHat, Fedora and openSuse, all of which currently ship GNOME Wayland sessions by default, are not serious distros. Get a grip, dude.

micko01 · 2024-04-22 07:44:23

hhh wrote:

hhh wrote:
That said, Wayland development is ramping up exponentially, so running it on Debian Bookworm/BunsenLabs Boron is not going to give you the best results in terms of app compatibility and performance, again IMO.
I should note that GNOME running Wayland has been the default session on Debian since Buster. Again, Dedo is way off the mark with this comment...
Dedoimedo wrote:
This means I will still keep using X11 on my systems (and most serious distros do the same thing)
Yes... Debian, Ubuntu, RedHat, Fedora and openSuse, all of which currently ship GNOME Wayland sessions by default, are not serious distros. Get a grip, dude.

Indeed! I think @hhh you gave me the inspiration to experiment.
blt bunsen, trixie, labwc vm

I patched in 'labwc' in neofetch for the scrot, the only non-stock package in the whole lot.

`sfwbar` is the bar, for which I do have a vertical config that looks remarkably like stock Boron with tint2. I'll get to that at a later date.

So following @johnraff 's instructions from this post (which I already did with stable) I decided to test it out with debian testing (trixie) using the Boron config files. It works quite well and if/when I get this to a reasonably 'stable' state I may make public the instructions.

I do hope that trixie developers update wlroots and labwc to 0.17.2 and 0.7.2 (due soon) respectively. That would make trixie a good candidate for an experimental bunsenlabs with labwc version (for whatever element is next - carbon?).

johnraff · 2024-04-22 08:21:55

^That looks very good. I was hoping that the "base" install might be useful for trying out BL on Wayland without too many peripheral apps getting in the way. Carbon BL on X11 might possibly be accompanied by a simple Beakerland.

micko01 · 2024-04-24 10:27:47

@johnraff , First pull request to kick off wayland development - and not specific to `labwc` or even wayland really. More of a bugfix.

Last edited by micko01 (2024-04-24 10:29:56)

johnraff · 2024-04-25 06:40:33

^Many thanks for the PR. I'm wavering a bit right now whether we ought to think about better integration of bl-exit --lock with bl-lock. (Please see my comment on GitHub.) Maybe best for now to pull your PR as-is, but think about bl-lock down the road. I was already a bit unhappy about having two separate packages doing the same thing, but in different ways...

micko01 · 2024-04-25 07:12:24

^ Things will change a lot when including wayland. I don't mind coding stuff like the following pseudo code:

if [[ -n "$WAYLAND_DISPLAY" ]]; then # wayland is running
  # do it this way
elif [[ -n "$DISPLAY" && -z "$WAYLAND_DISPLAY" ]]; then # X is running and wayland is not
  # do it another way
else # no graphical display
  # do it the other way
fi

There other ways too, XDG_DESKTOP springs to mind. I'm sure you've seen many different ways to detect what's running, and what's running beneath that etc.

I'm in for the ride when I have the time

johnraff · 2024-04-25 08:12:10

^Yes, I'm still not sure whether all our packages can be dual-purpose like that, or whether there will have to be specific bunsen-something-wayland packages...

johnraff · 2024-04-26 05:42:11

micko01 wrote:

I'm in for the ride when I have the time

That will be great!

I have zero experience with Wayland at this point, and plan to focus on trying to provide a kind of solid platform so others like yourself, @hhh or @PackRat can experiment more easily.

I'll come back to this thread now and then with questions and ideas though.

First question: would it be fair to say that it's not worth thinking about Wayland on Debian Bookworm? Best to start developing on Trixie/Carbon?

Last edited by johnraff (2024-04-26 05:44:42)

micko01 · 2024-04-26 10:26:43

johnraff wrote:

I have zero experience with Wayland at this point, and plan to focus on trying to provide a kind of solid platform so others like yourself, @hhh or @PackRat can experiment more easily.
I'll come back to this thread now and then with questions and ideas though.
First question: would it be fair to say that it's not worth thinking about Wayland on Debian Bookworm? Best to start developing on Trixie/Carbon?

Yes that is fair to say. The wayland packages are ancient. That said, Trixie aren't the latest either but not too old and there's still time for those to be updated to later versions.

johnraff · 2024-04-27 02:09:01

micko01 wrote:

...Trixie aren't the latest either...

There's also the option of putting the whole thing on hold till Forky becomes Testing.

hhh · 2024-04-27 03:51:36

We'll have to wait and see where Debian is going with Wayland. Fedora has already dropped Xorg from their 41 release. How long till Debian starts gearing fully towards Wayland by default remains to be seen. But considering that it's been the default GNOME session since Buster (Debian 10) tells you something.

johnraff · 2024-04-27 04:12:27

And default GNOME session means default Debian desktop, I think. Though "default" means less with Debian than with some other distros. If Debian is even a "distro".

#41 2024-03-14 12:24:04

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#42 2024-03-14 14:29:09

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#43 2024-03-17 00:42:50

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#44 2024-03-28 05:29:55

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#45 2024-04-09 11:57:32

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#46 2024-04-19 18:26:52

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#47 2024-04-20 00:18:42

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#48 2024-04-20 00:27:08

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#49 2024-04-20 01:16:38

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#50 2024-04-22 07:44:23

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#51 2024-04-22 08:21:55

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#52 2024-04-24 10:27:47

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#53 2024-04-25 06:40:33

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#54 2024-04-25 07:12:24

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#55 2024-04-25 08:12:10

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#56 2024-04-26 05:42:11

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#57 2024-04-26 10:26:43

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#58 2024-04-27 02:09:01

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#59 2024-04-27 03:51:36

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

#60 2024-04-27 04:12:27

Re: Wayland and BunsenLabs

Board footer