Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 21:18:48 +0200 > Joseph Burt wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: >> > >> > I really wouldn't recommend doing this.

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 21:18:48 +0200 Joseph Burt wrote: > Hi all, > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > I really wouldn't recommend doing this. > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi all, On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > I really wouldn't recommend doing this. On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > I kind of wish I shared your optimism, but I'm thinking more of a death > by a thousand

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 21:05:33 +0200 Joseph Burt wrote: > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > Popups (e.g. menus) in Wayland use protocol that provides the server > > with: > > - the relationship to the window which the popup is for,

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > It doesn't have to be specified in the protocol. It is what every compositor > does because everyone agreed early on that CSD is the default. Weston did it > then everyone else did it. To be compatible everyone stayed

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 08:17:29 +0200 Joseph Burt said: > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > > > It is CSD in Wayland for Wayland clients, unless somehow compositor and > > client negotiate something else. In the default case, if a

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > It is CSD in Wayland for Wayland clients, unless somehow compositor and client > negotiate something else. In the default case, if a client does not decorate > it > will not get any decorations (titlebar and so on)

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 15:49:48 +0200 Joseph Burt said: > Hi Olivier, > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Olivier Fourdan wrote: > > > > One thing to consider as well is that you will need to decorate the X11 > > windows as Wayland is basically client side

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > Popups (e.g. menus) in Wayland use protocol that provides the server > with: > - the relationship to the window which the popup is for, and > - the input event identity that triggered the popup. > > These are required on

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 15:59:17 +0200 Joseph Burt wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > No-one wanted to write yet another X11 window manager; what's there is > > there by necessity so as not to break existing

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi Daniel, On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > No-one wanted to write yet another X11 window manager; what's there is > there by necessity so as not to break existing clients. For instance, > pop-up menus rely heavily on the global co-ordinate system

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi Olivier, On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Olivier Fourdan wrote: > > One thing to consider as well is that you will need to decorate the X11 > windows as Wayland is basically client side decorations. I was under the impression that Wayland doesn't specify client- or

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi Joseph, On 6 September 2017 at 11:56, Joseph Burt wrote: > I'm thinking this might be a job for a bit of translation shim within > Xwayland. Everything an X client needs either has a Wayland equivalent > (through an X server and a little translating XWM shim) or, where >

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi, On 6 September 2017 at 12:56, Joseph Burt wrote: > I'm thinking this might be a job for a bit of translation shim within > Xwayland. Everything an X client needs either has a Wayland equivalent > (through an X server and a little translating XWM shim) or, where >

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi, I'm thinking this might be a job for a bit of translation shim within Xwayland. Everything an X client needs either has a Wayland equivalent (through an X server and a little translating XWM shim) or, where forbidden by Wayland, can be stubbed out with a few white lies e.g. "There are no

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 12:11:52 +0200 Olivier Fourdan wrote: > Hi, > > On 6 September 2017 at 11:48, Joseph Burt wrote: > > > To be clear, my first look at how the X11 channel is used in practice > > hasn't yet turned up the justification for its existence.

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi, On 6 September 2017 at 11:48, Joseph Burt wrote: > To be clear, my first look at how the X11 channel is used in practice > hasn't yet turned up the justification for its existence. The logic > usually seems to be "if X client, send event over X11, else Wayland," > which

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

To be clear, my first look at how the X11 channel is used in practice hasn't yet turned up the justification for its existence. The logic usually seems to be "if X client, send event over X11, else Wayland," which is redundant. There must be something big, since tacking on a X11 channel is a big

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Thank you Olivier! As I understand it, Wayland compositors are already compositing window managers. What aspect requires working outside of the protocol in this case? Absolute positions? Thanks again, Joseph On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Olivier Fourdan wrote: > Hi, > >

Re: Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Hi, Xwayland is basically an X server, like any X server, it requires an X11 Window manager for the users to manipulate the windows on screen (size, location, stacking etc.) And since those X11 windows go along with Wayland native surfaces, it makes a lot of sense to have that X11 window manager

Why isn't Xwayland just a Wayland client?

Most Wayland compositors, Weston and WLC-based ones included, carry around a bit of XWM code, essentially a protocol extension, to deal with Xwayland. Why? What is lacking in Xwayland? Thanks, Joseph ___ wayland-devel mailing list