Linux

8159 readers

74 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 11 hours ago by possiblylinux127 to c/[email protected]

59 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.

(page 2) 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

With Wayland there was time to work on a lot of the kinks before everyone started seriously switching.

Not if you were using Ubuntu in 2017 when they switched to Weston as the default display server for 17.10 and lots of people suffered a great deal from how half-baked the project was at the time. For me personally, the 17.10 upgrade failed to start the display server and I ended up reinstalling completely, then in 18.04 they set the default back to XOrg and that upgrade also failed for me, resulting in another reinstall.

I have no doubt that this single decision was responsible for a large amount of the Wayland scepticism that followed.

[–] possiblylinux127 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

People pretend Ubuntu is this great thing but in reality it hasn't been great in 15 years.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 hours ago

Out of all distros I've tried over the years, Ubuntu has always been the buggiest by far.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 hours ago

@drspod @possiblylinux127 Since I am using Intel graphics and there is an Xorg X server baked into the Linux kernel for Intel graphics, I switched to it at that time and have been using it ever since.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago (16 children)

Wayland didn't work out networking, even to this day, which is why I'm still using Xorg.

[–] possiblylinux127 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Wayland as a protocol that apps use to talk to the desktop. It doesn't use network at all really.

You need something like freeRDP for network access.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

@possiblylinux127 It is touted as a replacement for X-windows but the PRIMARY ADVANTAGE of X-windows is that you can run a program on one machine and display it on anther making Wayland completely useless in a networked context.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 hours ago

@possiblylinux127 It strikes me as weird someone down votes a simple statement of fact. I guess they have a problem with reality.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (15 replies)

load more comments