no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
5 comments in c/linux@lemmy.ml view that post
[–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Seems like popping open WSL in a Windows VM running inside a Linux host

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It is more like creating a Linux kernel deigned to run only WINE.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    A more apt comparison would be using the Windows guest to remote into the Linux host via xorg piping, waypipe, VNC, RDP, etcetera, which conveys your feeling of weirdness while being a closer approximation of what this really does.

  • source
  • parent
  • 3 comments in c/linux@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Oops.. didn't mean to delete my comment with the edit. It was imagining that this would have the main benefits of Wayland without having to give up X, or something like that, which sounded good to me.

    (edit: lwn has a comment that explains it. Sounds pretty good for those of us who enjoy font and geometry rendering from the '80s.)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Yes. It has basically the same issue that any compatibility layer is going to have. It will either faithfully reproduce X11 so well it will bring all of the nonsense Wayland was meant to do a way with (everything not directly related to displaying graphics, like font and geometry rendering from the '80s, network transparency, insecure event handling) OR it will attempt to get a reasonable subset working for modern X apps and it won't be compatible with dusty old binaries and X forwarding etc.

    Right now it looks like a shim for Xwayland so it's the first one, but as it matures we'll see.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Have we confirmed they're not Nazis?

  • source