Linux

8152 readers

79 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
No NSFW adult content
Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Btrfs should've been Wayland (self.linux)

submitted 8 hours ago by possiblylinux127 to c/[email protected]

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I think the problem with btrfs is that it entered the spotlight way to early. With Wayland there was time to work on a lot of the kinks before everyone started seriously switching.

On btrfs a bunch of people switched blindly and then lost data. This caused many to have a bad impression of btrfs. These days it is significantly better but because there was so much fear there is less attention paid to it and it is less widely used.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

@possiblylinux127 @lambalicious Wayland may be solid as a local display manager but it does not network.

[–] possiblylinux127 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It is a protocol not a display manager. The desktop runs everything and the apps connect to it.

Network was never part of the design and never will be

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

@possiblylinux127 Yes idiots keep touting it as a replacement for Xorg which IS a networking display and that is a feature I need, and I suspect if more people knew how to use it they'd also need it.

[–] possiblylinux127 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I think most people aren't living in the past. What is your use case exactly? What do you need a remote GUI for? RDP and other protocols exist and are much better especially in terms of performance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

@possiblylinux127 Again rdp, vnc, x2go, ONLY work for full desktops, they do not work for individual applications. If I've got a terminal session into a server and decide I want to fire up synaptic, X does that for me, Wayland doesn't and the overhead of starting an entire desktop to run a single app for a few minutes does not make sense.

[–] possiblylinux127 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

And there is were the community has kind diverged. Now days it is either headless servers or desktops.

Running individual apps is interesting but I am afraid that it is not super practical in 2024. However, there is this: https://github.com/udevbe/greenfield

Xorg is no longer being maintained for the most part and because the code base is so large there isn't anyone who understands the codebase. I still use it for my semi virtual PC as Xorg allows for a lot more flexibility than Wayland plus Xfce4 isn't completely ported yet. There will be a day when I move completely though. Probably when Xfce4 is Wayland native.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

I mean there is waypipe now ...