On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Pekka Paalanen <ppaala...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 21:18:48 +0200 > Joseph Burt <caseo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote: >> > >> > I really wouldn't recommend doing this. >> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Pekka Paalanen <ppaala...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > I kind of wish I shared your optimism, but I'm thinking more of a death >> > by a thousand papercuts kind of situation, not a single big failure >> > point. >> > >> > I'd be screaming in delight and joy if someone proved it is possible to >> > turn Xwayland into just a regular Wayland client that has no special >> > privileges nor requires any nasty Wayland extensions. >> >> Alright, I'm hearing a consensus of: worthwhile if possible, but >> probably unpleasant, somewhere between fiddly and very painful. I'll >> hack a bit at the problem and see how much it hurts. > > Hi Joseph, > > exactly. Good luck, reserve a good stock of booze, and don't waste all > of your sanity or liver! ;-) > > > Thanks, > pq
HI all, This is absolutely possible. What I'm working to implement at the moment: Every managed, user-movable X window is a surface, and is alone and static in its own full-resolution "workspace," which makes the surface-local to X coordinate transformation just adding a multiple of the vertical resolution to y. This is to avoid having to move fake positions around on resize. Position hints are ignored. Everything else is a subsurface. I'm working to get this all into Xwayland itself to avoid proxying. We'll see about that. Can anyone think of a fatal gotcha here? Cheers, Joseph _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel