8 ms·

Sadly it's bound to X11. The alternative for me was to migrate to sway[1] to have a similar environment in wayland. [1] - https://github.com/swaywm/sway/ http

Sadly it's bound to X11. The alternative for me was to migrate to sway[1] to have a similar environment in wayland. [1] - https://github.com/swaywm/sway/ https://github.com/swaywm/sway/

q3k 6y ago
Sadly Sway is bound to wayland.
- Foxboron 6y ago
  It greatly annoys me that wayland still doesn't have any solutions for synergy/barrier type software. I depend on it daily for using my desktop and laptop and it's tedious to make the switch as it currently is.
  - SubGenius 6y ago
    I've been meaning to try out barrier. How do you like it? Is it responsive/fast? I had synergy running across linux/mac machines a number of years ago and it wasn't super reliable back then..
    - Foxboron 6y ago
      I have been using synergy for 6 or 7 years. Barrier the past year. It works reliably, more so then synergy, and I'm typing this reply through barrier right now :) It also fixes a few quirks I had like xorg screen changes wasn't reflected in synergy and it would start having weird boundaries.
      - SubGenius 6y ago
        Ah good. Thanks, I'll give it a go today!
  - trefil 6y ago
    I made a program called rkvm which works on a level below display servers (works with uinput directly) and thus doesn't suffer from these problems. Currently, it only supports Linux and Windows, where only client support is implemented on Windows, but it works well for my use case. https://github.com/htrefil/rkvm https://github.com/htrefil/rkvm
    - Foxboron 6y ago
      Need server on windows and client on linux so this won't work properly yet for me.
- emptyparadise 6y ago
  Wayland has a bad case of security at the cost of usability. They've been adding protocols here and there but there are still obvious things missing. Last time I checked it wasn't even possible to create something like xdotool without relying on some nasty hacks.
  - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
    And on top of that the “security” is useless because any software that runs as one's user account can simply do things such as ptrace the compositor or override the compositor in the PATH with a malicious one or LD_PRELOAD the compositor. As soon as malicious software run as one's own user, then that is that and it can do anything that the user can do. The argument raised against this is that it should be used in conjunction with some measure of a sandboxing technique, and that X11 is “impossible to sandbox”, but X11 sandboxes exist: how they work is a proxy server that sits in between the sandboxed application and the real server that determines what to let through and what not, the sandboxed application thus believes it is the only thing running inside of it's own X11 server, which maps it onto the bigger one. Then the counter argument is that that “doesn't count” and isn't “true sandboxing”, but that is the exact same technique that sandboxes that use Wayland use for say DBus, or PulseAudio, and has always been the standard way of sandboxing such daemons and servers. That's always the highly theoretical argument that comes in to defend these promises that are false on a practical level “it doesn't count”, even though the practical result is the same. All the ways to circumvent Wayland's security “don't count” even though they can all the same be used to compromise it. I am quite convinced after having spoken with many a Wayland developer that nigh none of them actually care about the “security” they so often talk about: they care about a certain theoretical elegance of a “secure system" that only exists in theory but exists in no reality as something that actually has been practically realized. All the actual, effective, real world ways to pierce it are wished away with that they “don't count” as they don't exist in their theoretical dream world.
    - jchw 6y ago
      You are forgetting that you actually can sandbox and contain apps. Under X11, doing that and then giving the app access to the display is dangerous. Under Wayland it is not. This matters for Flatpak, Snap, firejail, etc. I have seen multiple such arguments that you can “sandbox” X11 access, with no proof or really bad compromises; I don’t believe it.
k323r 6y ago
Thanks!
gkbrk 6y ago
If the submission was for Sway, it would be equally sad that it was bound to Wayland. I think projects like this should link each other as alternatives though, to aid in discovery. Since they are for different protocols, I don't think they will lose anything by linking their "competitor". I can see that sway mentions and links to i3, but I can't see anything similar from i3. Not sure if they haven't noticed it or if they are not fond of it.
globular-toast 6y ago
Yep. I've been using sway for a year now and I like it more than i3. When I switched to wayland I also dumped nvidia which has generally been great, but I have had several problems with the Intel drivers, unfortunately. I run the stable kernel.org kernel and currently need to patch it so it works. But I'd rather run a system that I can fix then one I can't.
ddalex 6y ago
since sway and i3 are pretty much interoperable, I see no problems there.
- ageofwant 6y ago
  Unless you like your steam accelerated on your Nvidia card. Granted, this was ~9 months ago, would be pleased if this changed in the mean time.
ageofwant 6y ago
And sway does not do Nvidia.
- solarkraft 6y ago
  While I think the decision is unfortunate this might help understanding it: https://drewdevault.com/2017/10/26/Fuck-you-nvidia.html https://drewdevault.com/2017/10/26/Fuck-you-nvidia.html
  - ageofwant 6y ago
    Oh I'm a born again disciple of the Church of 'Fuck you Nvidia', brother. But no miracle has changed my 1.5k card into a AMD, yet.
- gkbrk 6y ago
  Sway works with any GPU that implements the proper API on Linux. Nvidia has a bad case of NIH syndrome and does their own thing independent from other GPU manufacturers. So it would be more accurate to say Nvidia does not do sway.
  - ageofwant 6y ago
    Yes, that's true. But something worth noting for chumps, like me, that gave good money to Nvidia in good faith.
DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
I boot straight into the console and then have a setup where I either run startx or start_sway. I love i3 and it was my first experience with tiling WM years ago. It is absolutely a radical break for me from all other WM's since tiling allows me to work in deep focus many desktops, 1 desktop per activity/task and my focus always on one thing not many. Also wanting not to miss out on the future I moved to sway in parallel. I am literally in sway 90% of the time. The only difference is if I have to use video / webRTC screensharing or similar (usually in the browser), in which case sway will not work. This is why I maintain a dual system of both i3/sway. Also I trust i3 to be more stable for when I am standing in front of a crowd or have to connect my system to a variety of different external beamers, monitors etc. It sounds nuts to "maintain" 2 WM's but my configuration and workflow never deviates no matter which system I use even across upgrades of i3/sway. When I plug in a new freshly installed machine I just fetch my dotfiles and have both i3/sway in exactly the same way as I'm used to ... It's incredibly easy keeping both around if one has to (or wants to). Bonus of sway is also that it has gaps support (which is cool on bigger screens, less important on laptops). edit: both sway / i3 gave me no problems at all running them under restrictive environments such as LD_PRELOAD=libhardened_malloc.so (from GrapheneOS) and also work with under firejail without problems. I'll stop since it's anyway clear I am a big fan of both :)
- Arnavion 6y ago
  >The only difference is if I have to use video / webRTC screensharing or similar (usually in the browser), in which case sway will not work. Screensharing under sway works fine with firefox and chromium through xdpw.
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    thanks for the pointer, haven't tried this yet. cool!
- grep_name 6y ago
  > I boot straight into the console and then have a setup where I either run startx or start_sway Interesting, I do the same thing but just use startx. I find it hard to find convincing reasons to move from X apart from it 'being dead,' which isn't very convincing to me. What benefits to you get from sway in your setup? Is it compatible with things like ssh X forwarding?
jeromenerf 6y ago
Sway is nice. Mostly a better i3, with great mouse support, easy multiple keyboard config, some aesthetic features, ... even the small tools around like swayidle, swaylock are fine. The most difficult part was to find a good wayland terminal and I recommend “foot”, https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot

Sadly it's bound to X11. The alternative for me was to migrate to sway[1] to have a similar environment in wayland. [1] - https://github.com/swaywm/sway/ https://github.com/swaywm/sway/

q3k 6y ago

Sadly Sway is bound to wayland.

Foxboron 6y ago
It greatly annoys me that wayland still doesn't have any solutions for synergy/barrier type software. I depend on it daily for using my desktop and laptop and it's tedious to make the switch as it currently is.
- SubGenius 6y ago
  I've been meaning to try out barrier. How do you like it? Is it responsive/fast? I had synergy running across linux/mac machines a number of years ago and it wasn't super reliable back then..
  - Foxboron 6y ago
    I have been using synergy for 6 or 7 years. Barrier the past year. It works reliably, more so then synergy, and I'm typing this reply through barrier right now :) It also fixes a few quirks I had like xorg screen changes wasn't reflected in synergy and it would start having weird boundaries.
    - SubGenius 6y ago
      Ah good. Thanks, I'll give it a go today!
- trefil 6y ago
  I made a program called rkvm which works on a level below display servers (works with uinput directly) and thus doesn't suffer from these problems. Currently, it only supports Linux and Windows, where only client support is implemented on Windows, but it works well for my use case. https://github.com/htrefil/rkvm https://github.com/htrefil/rkvm
  - Foxboron 6y ago
    Need server on windows and client on linux so this won't work properly yet for me.
emptyparadise 6y ago
Wayland has a bad case of security at the cost of usability. They've been adding protocols here and there but there are still obvious things missing. Last time I checked it wasn't even possible to create something like xdotool without relying on some nasty hacks.
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  And on top of that the “security” is useless because any software that runs as one's user account can simply do things such as ptrace the compositor or override the compositor in the PATH with a malicious one or LD_PRELOAD the compositor. As soon as malicious software run as one's own user, then that is that and it can do anything that the user can do. The argument raised against this is that it should be used in conjunction with some measure of a sandboxing technique, and that X11 is “impossible to sandbox”, but X11 sandboxes exist: how they work is a proxy server that sits in between the sandboxed application and the real server that determines what to let through and what not, the sandboxed application thus believes it is the only thing running inside of it's own X11 server, which maps it onto the bigger one. Then the counter argument is that that “doesn't count” and isn't “true sandboxing”, but that is the exact same technique that sandboxes that use Wayland use for say DBus, or PulseAudio, and has always been the standard way of sandboxing such daemons and servers. That's always the highly theoretical argument that comes in to defend these promises that are false on a practical level “it doesn't count”, even though the practical result is the same. All the ways to circumvent Wayland's security “don't count” even though they can all the same be used to compromise it. I am quite convinced after having spoken with many a Wayland developer that nigh none of them actually care about the “security” they so often talk about: they care about a certain theoretical elegance of a “secure system" that only exists in theory but exists in no reality as something that actually has been practically realized. All the actual, effective, real world ways to pierce it are wished away with that they “don't count” as they don't exist in their theoretical dream world.
  - jchw 6y ago
    You are forgetting that you actually can sandbox and contain apps. Under X11, doing that and then giving the app access to the display is dangerous. Under Wayland it is not. This matters for Flatpak, Snap, firejail, etc. I have seen multiple such arguments that you can “sandbox” X11 access, with no proof or really bad compromises; I don’t believe it.

k323r 6y ago

Thanks!

gkbrk 6y ago

If the submission was for Sway, it would be equally sad that it was bound to Wayland. I think projects like this should link each other as alternatives though, to aid in discovery. Since they are for different protocols, I don't think they will lose anything by linking their "competitor". I can see that sway mentions and links to i3, but I can't see anything similar from i3. Not sure if they haven't noticed it or if they are not fond of it.

globular-toast 6y ago

Yep. I've been using sway for a year now and I like it more than i3. When I switched to wayland I also dumped nvidia which has generally been great, but I have had several problems with the Intel drivers, unfortunately. I run the stable kernel.org kernel and currently need to patch it so it works. But I'd rather run a system that I can fix then one I can't.

ddalex 6y ago

since sway and i3 are pretty much interoperable, I see no problems there.

ageofwant 6y ago
Unless you like your steam accelerated on your Nvidia card. Granted, this was ~9 months ago, would be pleased if this changed in the mean time.

ageofwant 6y ago

And sway does not do Nvidia.

solarkraft 6y ago
While I think the decision is unfortunate this might help understanding it: https://drewdevault.com/2017/10/26/Fuck-you-nvidia.html https://drewdevault.com/2017/10/26/Fuck-you-nvidia.html
- ageofwant 6y ago
  Oh I'm a born again disciple of the Church of 'Fuck you Nvidia', brother. But no miracle has changed my 1.5k card into a AMD, yet.
gkbrk 6y ago
Sway works with any GPU that implements the proper API on Linux. Nvidia has a bad case of NIH syndrome and does their own thing independent from other GPU manufacturers. So it would be more accurate to say Nvidia does not do sway.
- ageofwant 6y ago
  Yes, that's true. But something worth noting for chumps, like me, that gave good money to Nvidia in good faith.

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago

I boot straight into the console and then have a setup where I either run startx or start_sway. I love i3 and it was my first experience with tiling WM years ago. It is absolutely a radical break for me from all other WM's since tiling allows me to work in deep focus many desktops, 1 desktop per activity/task and my focus always on one thing not many. Also wanting not to miss out on the future I moved to sway in parallel. I am literally in sway 90% of the time. The only difference is if I have to use video / webRTC screensharing or similar (usually in the browser), in which case sway will not work. This is why I maintain a dual system of both i3/sway. Also I trust i3 to be more stable for when I am standing in front of a crowd or have to connect my system to a variety of different external beamers, monitors etc. It sounds nuts to "maintain" 2 WM's but my configuration and workflow never deviates no matter which system I use even across upgrades of i3/sway. When I plug in a new freshly installed machine I just fetch my dotfiles and have both i3/sway in exactly the same way as I'm used to ... It's incredibly easy keeping both around if one has to (or wants to). Bonus of sway is also that it has gaps support (which is cool on bigger screens, less important on laptops). edit: both sway / i3 gave me no problems at all running them under restrictive environments such as LD_PRELOAD=libhardened_malloc.so (from GrapheneOS) and also work with under firejail without problems. I'll stop since it's anyway clear I am a big fan of both :)

Arnavion 6y ago
>The only difference is if I have to use video / webRTC screensharing or similar (usually in the browser), in which case sway will not work. Screensharing under sway works fine with firefox and chromium through xdpw.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  thanks for the pointer, haven't tried this yet. cool!
grep_name 6y ago
> I boot straight into the console and then have a setup where I either run startx or start_sway Interesting, I do the same thing but just use startx. I find it hard to find convincing reasons to move from X apart from it 'being dead,' which isn't very convincing to me. What benefits to you get from sway in your setup? Is it compatible with things like ssh X forwarding?

jeromenerf 6y ago

Sway is nice. Mostly a better i3, with great mouse support, easy multiple keyboard config, some aesthetic features, ... even the small tools around like swayidle, swaylock are fine. The most difficult part was to find a good wayland terminal and I recommend “foot”, https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot