Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tuna74 12 days ago
"Alternatively it might make sense to build some type of bespoke solution on top of a specific wayland stack, like re implementing what you get of talon in a kde plugin or via sway IPC. This seems viable to me but an incredible amount of work."

I think that is the only way forward. There is no "Linux desktop". There is KDE, Gnome etc. and if you want to do "system utilities" you have to target one of those.
2 comments
setopt 12 days ago
The point though is that there used to be a «Linux desktop» you could target before the Wayland transition. Fragmentation of an already small market segment is unfortunate.
link
chadgpt3 12 days ago
It's KDE now. GNOME is the penguin that went to the mountains while KDE largely tries to be compatible with things that aren't KDE.
link
setopt 12 days ago
Sure. I use KDE myself. I actually like the Gnome default UI/UX more, but I'm really not fond of their "our way or the highway" approach when it comes to customization and interoperability. KDE feels more in line with the true FOSS "spirit", and after a bit of customization, fits my needs better than Gnome.
link
tuna74 12 days ago
There was not really for system utilities. Apps, sure, but not system utilities.
link
setopt 12 days ago
What do you refer to as system utilities? All the stuff now subsumed by SystemD?
link
tuna74 11 days ago
Things like input methods, certain accessibility functions, screen savers and similar things.
link
MarsIronPI 10 days ago
Huh? Fcitx and IBus both worked on GNOME and KDE as far as I'm aware. Now, Fcitx using QT and IBus using GTK helps them feel more native on KDE and GNOME respectively, but they would both work.
link
tuna74 9 days ago
Doesn't seem possible on Gnome and not very straightforward on other DEs according to the arch wiki: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Fcitx5#Integration
link
kelnos 12 days ago
No, that's a terrible idea. The right thing to do is design a Wayland protocol that gives you the access you need, get it accepted into wayland-protocols, and wait for all the compositors to implement it.

Yes, that's a slow, annoying process, but doing something bespoke means either you do the same work over and over for every compositor, or you only support one or two compositors. Neither of those is a good result.

link
tuna74 12 days ago
It is way faster and better to implement what you want/need in the DE. Later, it it makes sense, you can standardize it.
link