On Sat, 2019-04-06 at 21:48:57 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 08:47:51PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I don't use GNOME at all, but I tried to switch to Wayland last month > > (from i3 to sway), and sadly the experience lasted only a couple of days. > > You changed display manager implementations and are trying to compare > that?
Well it was obviously easier to compare than against Weston/GNOME/KDE. > How can you differentiate between problems causes by the i3 to > sway switch from problems caused by xorg to wayland? Because the problems I listed were the ones that are obviously Wayland-related/specific or because I tried with Xwayland and native support. And because I think all sway-specific problems I found had already bugs filed. > > I noticed that not all big desktop programs support Wayland natively > > (such as Chromium), or do so out of the box (such as Qt or KDE), this > > implies you need to have XWayland running most of the time, which > > consumes around 100 MiB of resident memory. > > My gnome-shell consumes a multiple of that usualy. But much more > important: why is the qt wayland support not installed? On my main system that's way too much memory used, and i3 and sway consume just a fraction of that. For Qt, qtwayland5 is just a Suggests from libqt5gui5, and a Recommends from libkf5windowsystem5, or Depends from kwayland-integration via a Recommends from libkf5windowsystem5|libkf5idletime5. Even then, AFAIR Qt does not enable Wayland support by default, and it might need the following environment variables: # KDE export XDG_SESSION_TYPE=wayland export QT_QPA_PLATFORM=wayland-egl I also tried to play with: export QT_WAYLAND_FORCE_DPI=physical I also used: # Gtk3 (this might crash chromium f.ex.) export GDK_BACKEND=wayland export CLUTTER_BACKEND=wayland # SDL export SDL_VIDEODRIVER=wayland (For a tailing WM you might also want: export QT_WAYLAND_DISABLE_WINDOWDECORATION=1 export _JAVA_AWT_WM_NONREPARENTING=1 ?) So, are you sure you are not running Qt apps via Xwayland? To make sure I disabled Xwayland support to see what was not starting at all, as I wanted as much as possible to be running natively, to check if it was feasible to run w/o Xwayland. > > Wayland also uses libinput > > which I've found to be subpar compared to the synpatics input drivers. > > xorg only installs the libinput and the separate wacom input by default: Sure, and I've tried libinput with X.Org and for me it's the same subpar experience as on Wayland. The difference is that with X.Org I can install the synaptics driver. > > There seems to be also some issue with Qt/KDE programs and text DPI. > > I don't see such problems, and I use it in HiDPI mode, which becomes > increasingly more common. wireshark is now a Qt application and looks > fine, apart from the fact that it's Qt and the design choices of this > library. See above? > I could add a number of problems I found myself, but none of them are > relevant for Joe Random user. I think I qualified my reply enough as to what was relevant to the discussion and to what extent I care about the GNOME default? :) Dunno, just felt like commenting on my attemps as someone who really wants to switch away from X.Org, but didn't find it satisfactory yet. Regards, Guillem