Solved Pure wayland terminal

AlfredoLlaquet said:
This sounds cool. I had never heard of it.
Click to expand...
Google and Microsoft are working on it, last I heard. Not sure how hard.
https://github.com/a2ui-project/a2ui

I imagine it as huge desktop dynamic conky with clickable buttons and dials created for the specific task at hand.

When you tell it to create something in AUTOCAD, all you need to see is the actual design and a few buttons and dials for tweaks. No need to bother you with the whole Menu until you prompt for it.
 
DanielBowman said:
Google and Microsoft are working on it, last I heard. Not sure how hard.
https://github.com/a2ui-project/a2ui

I imagine it as huge desktop dynamic conky with clickable buttons and dials created for the specific task at hand.

When you tell it to create something in AUTOCAD, all you need to see is the actual design and a few buttons and dials for tweaks. No need to bother you with the whole Menu until you prompt for it.
Click to expand...
It sounds like handing your physical I/O channels to a 3rd party. A remote service operating your UI? That's a full-privilege pass.
 
rmomota said:
MacOS is based in BSD and it uses WindowServer that is similar to Wayland in terms of graphics rendering.
There's a clear performance gain by avoiding Xorg way of doing that.
But that's me having the control of my tech stack, right?
Click to expand...
Wayland compositors and Xorg are more similar than you may think.
Check out the Xorg drm driver and the e.g. wlroots drm 'backend'. The code is almost identical.

X11 is old but I am becoming increasingly convinced it will outlive Wayland. For example, we are still discussing the same old myths more than a decade later.
 
cracauer@ said:
Wayland is wack. Caused by insufficient exposure to software like XPra.
Click to expand...
Proper terminal servers is another reason for why I think X server has more of a future.

Ai models on server, agents spinning up their micro-XFCE virtual machines (GrokBot) also on server. Desktop becomes totally useless. Why have noisy, power hungry heating on a desk, drawing all the unnecessary windows via wayland? Be it homelab or company. Better put the server in a cellar and have just the terminal on a desk or in a lap - receiving the content via X client.
 
MG said:
It sounds like handing your physical I/O channels to a 3rd party. A remote service operating your UI? That's a full-privilege pass.
Click to expand...
80% of population does not care about sovereignty. They care about actual content/data, time saving and neuron fatigue (from studying manuals for every UI any given app came up with).
I can relate.
Still, on principle I would prefer all my I/O to remain inside my domain/property when necessary.
But that will come with a cost...for hardware and neurons/time spend on DYI solutions.
That is why we FreeBSD after all, isn't it?
Can't expect everyone do the same. Like we can't expect compiling from source.
 
Sometimes I wonder, why is it so important to have a terminal that will specifically run on Wayland, (and specifically not on Xorg) ? When I compile my stuff from ports, I enable both X11 and Wayland.

Even with KDE going Wayland-only for 6.8, I don't think it will refuse to run XTerm... XTerm will still run (with help of XWayland) in a Wayland KDE session, no problem.

I personally prefer Konsole for my terminal, it has all the features I could possibly want...

Xorg and Wayland don't exactly interfere with each other on the same machine, nothing really crashes. Even if an app does crash, it's kind of difficult to blame the specific graphics stack for that crash.

In case of a crash, if you troubleshoot it properly, it will most likely ultimately turn out to be an OOM error anyway.

🤷‍♂️
 
astyle said:
I enable both X11 and Wayland.
Click to expand...
That makes sense to me only if you have multiple optional DE in your system. It's worthy regarding disk space having the same software instead of duplicating it like having one for X11 and other for Wayland.
That doesn't make sense to me when you have only one DE as you'll be using more disk.
You can do that test yourself.
Build with X11, build with both and build with Wayland only...after waiting for several hours of course
Compare and take you conclusions.

UPDATE:
I'm building Kitty and it's going and going... 6 hours already
 
I care maybe because I'm a old school developer.
And someday you'll care too the day you need to compile something that will run in a very limited memory chip.
 
rmomota said:
I care maybe because I'm a old school developer.
And someday you'll care too the day you need to compile something that will run in a very limited memory chip.
Click to expand...
X.org is 6MB and Wayland less than 1. There's no serious situation that demands 1 of both. To save storage space?
Can you even run any program in Wayland without starting X? I never tried because I never had a reason. But many things depend on it anyway. No idea for what exactly. It seems a pushed default setting. I'm not aware of a global disable setting.

pkg info -r wayland:
Code: 
egl-wayland-1.1.22
gstreamer1-plugins-gl-1.28.6
gtk3-3.24.52
gtk4-4.20.4
libva-2.24.1
libxkbcommon-1.13.2
mesa-dri-26.2.2
mesa-libs-26.2.2
sdl2-2.32.10_2
vulkan-loader-1.4.360
libxkbcommon-1.13.2 (libwayland-client.so.0)
libva-2.24.1 (libwayland-client.so.0)
mesa-libs-26.2.2 (libwayland-client.so.0)
mesa-dri-26.2.2 (libwayland-client.so.0)
egl-wayland-1.1.22 (libwayland-client.so.0)
gstreamer1-plugins-gl-1.28.6 (libwayland-client.so.0)
gtk4-4.20.4 (libwayland-client.so.0)
sdl2-2.32.10_2 (libwayland-client.so.0)
gtk3-3.24.52 (libwayland-client.so.0)
gstreamer1-plugins-gl-1.28.6 (libwayland-cursor.so.0)
sdl2-2.32.10_2 (libwayland-cursor.so.0)
gtk3-3.24.52 (libwayland-cursor.so.0)
gstreamer1-plugins-gl-1.28.6 (libwayland-egl.so.1)
gtk4-4.20.4 (libwayland-egl.so.1)
sdl2-2.32.10_2 (libwayland-egl.so.1)
gtk3-3.24.52 (libwayland-egl.so.1)
egl-wayland-1.1.22 (libwayland-server.so.0)
 
MG said:
There's no serious situation that demands 1 of both. To save storage space?
Click to expand...
Multiply that for all your apps, clients, a full system with extra code, maybe that will use some after all.
But I got your point :)
It's not really a matter of saving storage to me, even if I mentioned it regarding chips memory, that' s not the case here.
I just want to keep it clean of having extra code in every app taking the risk of having yet unknown vulnerabilities (CVE) ready to be exploited?
I do mind and in my opinion everyone else should too but that's up to each one choices.
Let's say we are at this moment in a hybrid way of rendering applications.
True that Wayland can't survive without Xwayland but I'm confident it will be discarded someday.

Back to the topic, I found Foot to be a good choice, seems fast and lightweight too, at least the client part.
It just don't have a tab way of having multiple terminals but I don't use that anyway.
Buuuut... I don't know yet.

Thanks!
 
rmomota said:
Multiply that for all your apps, clients, a full system with extra code, maybe that will use some after all.
But I got your point :)
It's not really a matter of saving storage to me, even if I mentioned it regarding chips memory, that' s not the case here.
I just want to keep it clean of having extra code in every app taking the risk of having yet unknown vulnerabilities (CVE) ready to be exploited?
I do mind and in my opinion everyone else should too but that's up to each one choices.
Let's say we are at this moment in a hybrid way of rendering applications.
True that Wayland can't survive without Xwayland but I'm confident it will be discarded someday.

Back to the topic, I found Foot to be a good choice, seems fast and lightweight too, at least the client part.
It just don't have a tab way of having multiple terminals but I don't use that anyway.
Buuuut... I don't know yet.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I think the implication that it should be 1 of both can't have valid arguments. X.org, Wayland or anything else are graphical programs that have no business with any system-wide configuration and can start and exit like any other program, only not at the same time.
Does Wayland come with a point of no return until the next reboot? That would be a serious and a bit suspicious limitation...
 
rmomota said:
I'm building Kitty and it's going and going... 6 hours already
Click to expand...
6 hours is kinda painful... what's your hardware specs?
😲


I think that even a 1st-gen Ryzen won't take that long to compile just the x11/kitty. Some dependencies of it might take awhile. Konsole took less than 5 minutes to compile with a Ryzen 5 1400...

Timing the compilation of x11/kitty on a Ryzen AI 7 445, it was 48.43 seconds as reported by time(1)...
 
rmomota said:
I'm building Kitty and it's going and going... 6 hours already
Click to expand...
astyle said:
6 hours is kinda painful... what's your hardware specs?
😲


I think that even a 1st-gen Ryzen won't take that long to compile just the x11/kitty. Some dependencies of it might take awhile. Konsole took less than 5 minutes to compile with a Ryzen 5 1400...

Timing the compilation of x11/kitty on a Ryzen AI 7 445, it was 48.43 seconds as reported by time(1)...
Click to expand...
Pretty sure that there are dependencies (and dependencies of dependencies) going on as well.
 
Rust takes about 2.5 hours on my build server (old dual Xeon, got plenty of RAM). Python shouldn't take long though, python312 only took 10 min. here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top