• 1 Post
  • 26 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 6th, 2023

help-circle





  • Ok, because of this post - I decided to bite the bullet and try wayland again. And it was much better experience this time:

    I’ve installed sway “pattern” on OpenSuse-Tumbleweed and:

    • Previous time I had some issues with lightdm not supporting sway, now - it just works.
    • I still use xdotool and i3-msg in my custom scratchpad script and yet everything is working.

    waybar absolutely supports clicking tray icons.

    I confused it with swaybar, that’s installed with sway by default and should be an i3bar-compatible. Waybar doesn’t seem to support i3bar protocol, but anyway, after I configured it - it’s like 95% there from what I want.

    • I had to force xcb platform for appimage of nekoray (qt VPN gui), because it’s complaining about missing wayland-egl plugin. But it’s a small problem with straightforward fix, so not that bad.

  • I could switch tomorrow if I could do my current setup:

    • Tiling Window manager (sway?)
    • simple status bar to output text from a script with clickable applet icons (waybar?)
    • the way to show/hide windows on a button press - I have a script that I use to quickly toggle 3 dropdown terminal windows

    Last time I tried Wayland in December, I had issues with waybar not supporting clicking tray applet icons. Also I’ve ported my dropdown terminals script to support sway - and it worked half the time, like, literally every second key press was ignored.

    On one hand I have X session that currently has no downsides for me, on other - wayland that has no upsides. Tell me, why would I switch?











  • janAkali@lemmy.onetoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Flatpaks and Snaps become more efficient in terms of storage usage the more you use them…

    I’m not disagreeing with that, but how many apps an average user requires that he can’t find in the distro’s repository? And how many snaps he should have installed, so it’d be more space-efficient than appimages, 10? 20? 30?

    hint: for me - one is too many.

    Flatpak and Snap share dependencies while Appimage doublicates all of them…

    On the other hand, appimage only includes the libraries actually required by an app. Where Snap/Flatpack install big fat runtimes.
    I’ve recently made a very simple gtk4 app and packaged it with all dependencies into a 10mb appimage you can just download and run. The very same app would rely on 250+ mb gtk4 runtime with snap.
    And I could be fine with that; but no, it’s not that simple, you’ll have x3 gtk4 runtimes on your system. Because snap keeps 3 last versions of every snap pkg and it’s dependencies. I don’t know what flatpack installs, but it’s not efficient in that regard either.

    2-3 gigs of libraries a program might not even need. It’s just wasted space for an average linux user. And if I was fine with that, I would be using Windows right now.




  • janAkali@lemmy.onetoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Yes, sizes might be inaccurate - it’s been about a year last time I tried snap or flatpak. All I remember is that snap installs around 300 mb gtk3 runtime and it’s often 2 or more of them, because different snaps might rely on different gtk versions + other dependencies.
    And I remember that when snap and flatpak compared, allegedly flatpak requires more storage space.

    I am aware that runtime sizes doesn’t scale with number of packages past maybe 3-4, but I have only 4 appimages on my system right now and they take ~200 mb, it is absurd that I’d need 10 times more space allocated for the same (or worse) functionality.