[HN Gopher] PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support ___________________________________________________________________ PCSX2 Disables Wayland Support Author : MaximilianEmel Score : 75 points Date : 2023-11-26 20:23 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (github.com) (TXT) w3m dump (github.com) | iamcreasy wrote: | > KDE isn't too buggy, GNOME is a complete disaster. | | What did the author mean by this? Don't know much about Wayland | other than it is window system, replacing x11. | | KDE Plasma wiki[1] says, "KDE Plasma 5 is the fifth and current | generation of the graphical workspaces environment created by | KDE....KDE Plasma 5 uses the X Window System and Wayland." | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KDE_Plasma_5 | lights0123 wrote: | There is no de-facto Wayland software like there is the X.org | server. Wayland is just a protocol--KDE and GNOME (through | Mutter) both implement it. The author is saying that KDE did so | better than GNOME. | djbusby wrote: | Briefly: it's a big lift for all the different desktop | environments (DE) to move from X11 to Wayland. Lots of moving | parts; re-implementing and re-factoring is needed. | londons_explore wrote: | The vast majority of users today run a hybrid of Wayland and | XWayland... Getting the worst of both worlds, and extra bugs | to go on top... | nolist_policy wrote: | That is not true though, XWayland is better maintained than | native Xorg. It is here to stay for backwards | compatibility. | | Disclaimer: I run ChromeOS and Wayland just works. | jacoblambda wrote: | KDE and GNOME roll their own wayland libs for their compositor. | | These have varying levels of quality with their own unique | quirks and bugs. The "gold standard" for wayland at the moment | is wlroots which is what basically every other wayland | compositor uses. PCSX2 apparently works perfectly fine on | wlroots based compositors but has some quirks with KDE wayland | and is nigh unusable with GNOME's super janky wayland | implementation. | DistractionRect wrote: | Basically Wayland only supports a subset of what X11 could do. | It's more scoped and does a good job with what it's supposed to | do. | | That said, the rest of the functionality is now an exercise for | desktop environments, and they can (and do) things differently. | OmarAssadi wrote: | As noted by other commenters, there are several compositors | available for Wayland (essentially the bit that actually | implements Wayland). | | Some are compositors are developed independently of any | particular DE, like wlroots, labwc, hikari, etc, but some are | part of a larger project, as is the case with mutter and kwin | (GNOME and KDE, respectively). And most of the time you install | some sort of GNOME/KDE + Wayland distro, you'll usually also | end up with their compositors. | | GNOME's implementation in particular has historically caused a | lot of drama relative to some of the others. MPV used to have a | pretty spicy wiki section dedicated to GNOME (it still kind of | exists, though has been toned down a fair bit and addresses | NVidia and some other specific issues more directly [1]): | | - https://github.com/mpv- | player/mpv/wiki/FAQ/ddcbe1b88a99d2568... (2020) | | [1]: https://github.com/mpv- | player/mpv/wiki/FAQ/a70c96040ad4fa374... | | - | seeknotfind wrote: | What a refreshingly honest commit message. The corporate over- | professional dribble on work commit messages is so bland by | comparison. That being said, I'm still left wondering if Wayland | support on one of my projects is a problem. | jdlyga wrote: | Are we subjecting ourselves to the sunk cost fallacy with | Wayland? It's been "almost ready" for 6 or 7 years at this point. | OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: | Ignoring the exponential pace Wayland has improved for end | users in the last 36 months (see for example Plasma/Wayland | Showstoppers[0]), would staying on X11 not be more of a sunk | cost fallacy? There aren't even any Wayland alternatives with | meaningful momentum | | [0] | https://community.kde.org/index.php?title=Plasma/Wayland_Sho... | barkingcat wrote: | It's entirely possible that _both_ suffer from sunk cost | fallacy, and from that analysis there isn 't a "better" or | "more" sunk cost. It's already sunk, anything you sink | further into it is a waste. | rcxdude wrote: | A way forward probably looks like a more feature-oriented fork | of wayland than a do-over. The basic protocol is fine, it's | just there's no sense of urgency to actually add important | features to the standard, just a long design-by-comittee | process which bogs down progress and frustrates developers and | users. | Gigachad wrote: | It's been ready ready for a long time now. It's been on by | default in Fedora for a long time now and I've not experienced | issues. Or at least fewer issues than with X11. | askonomm wrote: | Ready ready on what? Select hardware? I've thrown 4 regular | off the shelf laptops at various DE's using Wayland and they | all suck in various ways to the point that they're not even | usable. Meanwhile I can throw Windows on all of them, and | they work flawlessly. I'm quite tired of Linux guys saying | their stuff works just fine, without mentioning how extremely | limited is the hardware support to actually run any of those | things, and judging from various forums, even if you have | supported hardware, things break. | Laaas wrote: | This is about X vs Wayland, not Windows vs Linux. | askonomm wrote: | It's about the GPU used in regular laptops, I'd imagine, | for which Windows has drivers and support, and Linux does | not. That's my point. X11 for those laptops works more | reliably, but even then there's immense screen tearing, | blurry texts, broken fractional scaling, etc. I just | don't know why I would ever use software of this quality | when even Windows XP had less issues like this in its | hayday, and it released 20 years ago. | bryanlarsen wrote: | The large majority of laptops use Intel or AMD APU's, | both of which work fabulously. Gaming laptops using | NVidia chips aren't regular laptops. | Gigachad wrote: | It's ready for me in that it works better than X11 on my | hardware. No it's not flawless like MacOS and to some | extent Windows, but it's certainly an improvement over what | we had. | LtWorf wrote: | Works flawlessly if you've never edited a Xorg config | file... if you did, there is no way to keep using the | same configuration | agildehaus wrote: | I'm using it full-time and the only issues I experience are | with XWayland. But even those have been going away as native | Wayland support lands in apps and nVidia slowly improves their | drivers. | | Scaling and overall performance it's night and day versus X11. | tannhaeuser wrote: | If you mean wayland compositors in general, that's more like 15 | years according to [1]. | | For gnome's Mutter, it's 12 years: | | > _Until they sort their s*t out, which is unlikely, since | there 's been very little progress over the last decade, just | keep it disabled._ | | Begging the question if Wayland itself is already antiquated | and if its maintenance perspective is any better than X.org's. | When lack of developer motivation to work on X.org appears to | be the sole point of leaving it behind since new apps haven't | been created and (Nvidia) drivers for Wayland may still be | problematic. | | I can totally understand the desire to start with a clean | architecture, but chances are we have to basically start over | at square one, with the problem of how to attract younger devs | now who want to invest their time into newer languages and/or | graphics pipelines rather than maintaining Wayland. | | [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_(protocol) | haunter wrote: | Further down: | | >... it is disabled on our release builds, because it's nothing | but headaches for us, because of its broken by design nature | causing issues for users. I listed a bunch of them in the OP as | well. | | >We're sick of getting blamed for bugs in wayland compositors, | while the various committees sit around arguing with each other, | finally decide on standard ways of doing things after half a | decade, then GNOME ruins it all by refusing to implement it. | MuffinFlavored wrote: | Linux in general... | | Think of the efforts wasted in duplicate/overlapping | functionality between maintenance + development of | distributions, package managers, shells, compilers, C | libraries, desktop environments, etc. | idle_zealot wrote: | Unfortunately that's not avoidable. The duplication exists | because of disagreement regarding how things _should_ be | done. The alternative is not "my preferred project gets all | the resources" but "my preferred project doesn't exist and | all the resources go to some fundamentally flawed project | that I don't want to use". See Windows or macOS for how that | turns out. | MuffinFlavored wrote: | > The duplication exists because of disagreement regarding | how things should be done. | | Is there too high a level of this disagreement in open- | source software? Should it be called out from the | perspective of "please try to use your time more | effectively instead of contributing to fragmentation | because it's harmful to the ecosystem from a macro | perspective"? | oynqr wrote: | Wayland lacks a crutch to work around broken multi-monitor | handling in composit | oynqr wrote: | Side note: The Glider HN client makes it real easy to fat | finger comments since the rewrite. No editing or deleting | either. Sigh. | hashworks wrote: | Actions like this will just hurt Wayland in the long run. It | needs more users, and for that more applications that support it | by default. No one will bring X11 to the level of Wayland, but | someone might fix the existing Wayland problems. | Gigachad wrote: | Not sure it will do anything to hurt Wayland. The app will just | run in XWayland which is mostly impossible to tell between a | native Wayland app for users. | rowanG077 wrote: | Xwayland is instantly recognizable as shitty due to | fractional scaling. Which almost everyone with a modern | laptop uses. | Gigachad wrote: | I might not be up to date on this, but does fractional | scaling work at all on Linux under any setup? Last I | checked GTK just flat out didn't support it or something. | imiric wrote: | X11 today works better for more users than Wayland. No user | will want to switch to something that provides a worse | experience. | | Until these issues are ironed out, it's delusional to think | that making Wayland the default will make users happy. Keep it | as an experimental feature, and once it provides an objectively | better experience for everyone, make it the default. | | These technical discussions by folks in the trenches often miss | the forest for the trees. Users don't care that X11 is | difficult to support, develop and maintain. They just want a | working system. By the looks of it from this GH issue, Wayland | is also a pain for developers. What a sad state of affairs for | Linux. | hashworks wrote: | I guess I'm just hoping for some user that will be bugged | enough by problems in Wayland that they decide to fix them. | The chance of that increases with user count. | | I understand that the bulk "forest" of Linux users don't care | about their window manager / desktop environment, but it's a | higher number than in other operating systems. This approach | wouldn't work in Windows or MacOS, in Linux it might. | dinckelman wrote: | As long as the option to keep it turned on exists, I have no | issues with this. It's one thing to move forward with a new | stack, but it's a different thing to have it as default when it | doesn't fully work | BaculumMeumEst wrote: | I'm not sure if it's funnier to see popular projects shunning | wayland because it sucks or Linus looking to move kernel | development away from an email based workflow because "it really | isn't working anymore". There is such an insane amount of coping | about both of those topics online. | Laaas wrote: | FWIW all the reasons seem like an aversion to complying with how | Wayland works. | | Yes, you can't position windows absolutely, but that's because | you're not supposed to do that. | | In any case I don't see how being able to position windows is | relevant at all to PCXS2's functioning on Wayland? Just don't | position windows if you can't? | | It's an incredibly dumb reason not to support the protocol. Xorg | is mostly unmaintained AFAIK. | | See https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland- | protocols/-/m... for the discussion on this | fiddlerwoaroof wrote: | One person's unmaintained is another's stable | asveikau wrote: | > Yes, you can't position windows absolutely, but that's | because you're not supposed to do that. | | I think about 40 years of GUI APIs disagree with this. | ryandrake wrote: | > Yes, you can't position windows absolutely, but that's | because you're not supposed to do that. | | Why not? This seems like a pretty opinionated policy from | something that's supposed to be a platform to enable | applications. Why should some other developer dictate how an | application should work? I'd expect "My way or the highway" | from Apple, but not from a linux API. | Arnavion wrote: | It's more nuanced than "should be able to do it" and | "shouldn't be able to do it". The problem is covered in the | wayland-protocols MR that the PCSX2 PR author also linked to | (and failed to appreciate): | https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland- | protocols/-/m... | kcb wrote: | Even if X11 goes away XWayland will be around. | stefan_ wrote: | That thread is a fantastic reason to never run wayland. | bryanlarsen wrote: | Another option might be to disable only on Gnome or Nvidia since | those seem to be the source of most of the problems. | apatheticonion wrote: | As a naive user who largely hasn't had any issue with it. Is | Wayland that bad? | bryanlarsen wrote: | In my experience Wayland is pretty bad on Nvidia binary driver, | has some annoyances on Gnome and works fabulous on AMD hardware | with KDE or a wlroots based compositor. | LtWorf wrote: | The internet is full of people that will inform you that all | the stuff that stops working when switching to wayland is your | own fault and you're a liar anyway. | | I'm quite convinced these people just use windows and | occasionally open linux in a vm for 10 minutes. | TillE wrote: | Aside from bugs and driver issues, Wayland has some unfortunate | design limitations. For example, Dear ImGui multi-viewports don't | work because "Wayland doesn't let application read or write | windows positions." | | https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/wiki/Multi-Viewports | | This is a feature available on Windows, macOS, and of course X11. | Making choices like this means desktop Linux becomes even more of | a weird island that nobody wants to support. | reisse wrote: | Quoting @stenzek | | > But Wayland is just broken, and everyone would rather sit | around arguing with each other instead of actually addressing the | design flaws. | | > It's not the first time such a proposal has been put forward. | Something that developers need for their applications to work | properly on WL (particularly multi-window applications), and it | gets vetoed. Every other OS manages this fine. But apparently | we're in the wrong for not conforming to some warped view of how | applications should be, despite our applications working fine on | every other platform. | | This is so damn true. Wayland lacks a Linus-style BDFL saying | that the kern... the compositor is for applications, and not the | other way around. We won't have nice things until Wayland | maintainers stop thinking about what their end users must or must | not do, and start closing feature gaps with X and | compositors/window managers on other OSes. Right now they're | reinventing the wheel while making it square. | NekkoDroid wrote: | My opinion on a few of the points they have: | | > Stupid obsession with CSD in Gnome | | I get why GNOME devs don't wanna implement it (most of the times | looks out of place for the app, or the app looks out of place to | the system if it doesn't use the system toolkit, so it's just | better for them to roll something that looks good for the app) | and the XWayland implementation for SSDs are still a holdover | that would need to be ported that they don't want to do. But then | again to my knowledge QT has a way to make a header bar (I | _think_ even one in GTK style) and there is libdecor that handles | headerbars. | | > Inability to position windows | | xdg-session-management is being worked to handle restoring of | window positions. There are some contensious extensions being | discussed about other window placements but they are still very | much in flux. I personally am impartital for the actual use of | the features and if they are really that necessary. | | > Hacks in render-to-main because WL craps itself otherwise | | This sounds more like a problem with the project itself than | wayland considering the meriad of other things able to work, but | then again its an emulator that might be doing some very weird | stuff so I can't say much about it. | | > Despite said hacks, game list still glitches after stopping | emulation, happens more often in gnome | | Probably a cascading problem from the previous | | > NVIDIA just crashes in swap chain creation under Wayland | | Not exactly _too_ surprised, although my laptop with Intel /NV | hybrid has been working mostly fine for my mostly basic usage. | | > Broken global menus | | Those are a thing anywhere other than OSX? How do they handle | this on Windows? | anaisbetts wrote: | Windows doesn't have global menus, it defines an API to get the | workspace coordinates, which allows apps to know the area | available to the window (i.e. not covered by the Start Menu) | anaisbetts wrote: | GNOME as a platform (and by extension, all of their associated | projects which unfortunately includes the Wayland protocol) has | such a bizarre worldview - it's like they think they can treat | the Desktop OS, with all of its user expectations and existing | working software, and remake it as a bigger iPadOS, to no one's | actual benefit. | | What do I get in return for having to give up all of these things | that used to work? It's not faster, it doesn't do extra things I | couldn't do before - it's _strictly_ downsides all the way down | shmerl wrote: | _> NVIDIA just crashes in swap chain creation under Wayland_ | | I'd say ignore Nvidia, their Wayland support is junk (until | nouveau+nvk catches up). It's not a Wayland problem, it's Nvidia | problem. | | For dealing with CSD mess, there is libdecoration that SDL | started using. | | In general - just use SDL for for DE integration, instead of | trying to reinvent the wheel. | evanjrowley wrote: | Due to the headline, it has dawned on me just now that the Steam | Deck uses X11. Been using PCSX2 successfully on it for several | months now. I never thought about whether it was using Wayland or | X11 until reading this. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-11-26 23:00 UTC)