Bug 101741

Nothing 'runs under Wayland', it just might support Wayland. If you're running a GNOME session, then regardless of whether it's X11 or Wayland underneath, then GNOME can help you address your bug (they have good bug reporting instructions). Equally, if you're running KDE then it's a KDE compositor (also good instructions).

The Fedora wiki page has a page which might help here too:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Wayland_problems

If you're not sure which session you've installed and are running, tools like 'ps' can help you identify this. In general though, just work with your desktop environment: if you're running GNOME or KDE or Enlightenment or anything else - speak to them. Wayland is only an implementation detail.

Wayland is a computer protocol that specifies the communication between a display server (called a Wayland compositor) and its clients, as well as a reference implementation of the protocol in the C programming language.

Because of that, you have to know what compositor Wayland serves. Do we agree on this?

_nobody_

Let me rephrase what you're saying. 'HTTP is a computer protocol that specifies the communication between a web browser and a web server. Because of that, you have to know what server HTTP serves.'

I believe you have it backwards. Users do not start with a technology (Wayland, HTTP), and work from there to an implementation (GNOME/KDE, Chrome/Firefox). They start with the visible part (the desktop/browser) and the implementation is a detail of this.

It's incredibly obvious what desktop you are running. If you're running GNOME, it looks like GNOME. Ditto KDE and Enlightenment. Whether or not it's running on X11 or Wayland is an implementation detail of that desktop.

I understand what you're saying, but I do not believe there are users out there who know that they are running Wayland, but are not sure if they're running GNOME or KDE or way-cooler.

Again, the principle remains: start from the top down. If you are having issues with Fedora, report the bug to Fedora. If you are having issues with GNOME, report the bug to GNOME.

> Let me rephrase what you're saying. 'HTTP is a computer protocol that
> specifies the communication between a web browser and a web server.
> Because of that, you have to know what server HTTP serves.'

Nope. I never said that. NOT at all. You are wrong, and you know that you're wrong. You are putting the words in my mouth. Not good, not right!

I am saying this: "Wayland is a computer protocol that specifies the communication between a display server (called a Wayland compositor) and its clients, as well as a reference implementation of the protocol in the C programming language."

Now... I will explain, why I need (and anybody who is conscious enough) to know what Wayland server does run beneath Wayland.

> Pekka Paalanen 2017-07-10 07:23:01 UTC writes: Every display server has
> its own way of storing its log output.

So, because what Mr. Pekka Paalanen says, it is obvious that we/GNOME users MUST know the Wayland server in order to facilitate logs.

Sorry, but your reasoning/logic is AGAIN rejected. 

Thank you for understanding,
_nobody_

My opinion is exactly what Daniel said.

End users do not choose or use Wayland. End users choose and use a desktop environment. How that desktop environment works under the hood is irrelevant to the user.

Desktop environments can use Wayland as a branding name, like GNOME Wayland, but it's still a flavour of GNOME.

All that said, you can make an educated guess based on the globals advertised through wl_registry. 'weston-info' is a tool that lists them, works on any Wayland server. A much more reliable method would be to use 'ps' to see what processes are running, if you cannot find an "About" button on your desktop.

If your idea was to help debugging problems, then that too is specific to the desktop environment and distribution you are running.

Furthermore, I would also argue that identifying the Wayland server via protocol is actively harmful. It promotes adding server bug workarounds in applications instead of reporting and fixing the real problem, and it bypasses the intended feature discovery mechanisms.

Closing.

You cannot pick GNOME and a Wayland server separately, they are always a package deal. A desktop environment is a package deal.

You pick a DE, and it implies a certain a display server. That's it.

Reopening,

The hard coding is NOT the way how to solve the flex scallable GFX architecture.

Proposal rejected.

_nobody_

Wayland is not a program you run. Just like HTTP is a protocol served by Apache/nginx/..., and SMTP is a protocol served by Postfix/Exim/..., Wayland is a protocol served by implementations such as Weston (where the logging has been proven to exist), Mutter, KWin, etc. If you do not like the implementation of Mutter, then you must discuss it with Mutter developers.

This is different to X11, where, practically speaking, there is only one server (Xorg).

That is the design of Wayland. If you do not like that design, then you are welcome to design your own window system, which works completely differently, and make sure the logging is to your taste.

Please stop 'rejecting' the resolution and reopening the bug. I'm sorry that you do not like the design of Wayland, but it is not something that can or will be changed.

We have patiently explained to you how Wayland works, where to find the GNOME logs under Fedora, how to discuss any issues you have with GNOME's logging system (which, again, is _not_ our software) with the GNOME developers, how to discuss issues with the Fedora developers, and even completely incorrect bugs such as #101750. But my patience is beginning to come to an end.

I'll also come to this later... OK?

I will leave it resolved, for now. I do NOT think it is resolved. Time Will Tell (once somebody would like to design some other Wayland server beneath GNOME on Wayland, different then Weston).

And I am patient enough to wait (as for the difference to you). :-)

_nobody_

I finally discover what Wayland server I am running at GNOME on Wayland!

[user@localhost ~]$ loginctl 
   SESSION        UID USER             SEAT             TTY             
         4       1000 user             seat0            /dev/tty7       
        c1         42 gdm              seat0            /dev/tty1       
         2          0 root             seat0            tty6            

3 sessions listed.
[user@localhost ~]$ loginctl show-session 2 -p Type
Type=tty
[user@localhost ~]$ loginctl show-session 4 -p Type
Type=wayland
[user@localhost ~]$ loginctl show-session c1 -p Type
Type=wayland
[user@localhost ~]$ ps -elf | grep X
0 S gdm        1481   1311  0  80   0 - 66519 -      Jul10 tty1     00:02:33 /usr/bin/Xwayland :1024 -rootless -noreset -listen 4 -listen 5 -displayfd 6
0 S user       1938   1930  0  80   0 - 70783 ep_pol Jul10 tty7     00:02:30 /usr/bin/Xwayland :0 -rootless -noreset -listen 4 -listen 5 -displayfd 6
0 S user      37054   3099  0  80   0 - 29861 pipe_w 15:05 pts/0    00:00:00 grep --color=auto X
[user@localhost ~]$ 

It is... Xwayland???

I'll go and open THE SAME BUG on Product GNOME!?

You, guys, are complete mess! Man! :-(

_nobody_

(In reply to _nobody_ from comment #10)
> You, guys, are complete mess! Man! :-(

Using language like this is not respectful, polite, or helpful. The footer contains a link to the code of conduct here, which you would do well to read:
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/CodeOfConduct/

XWayland is not a Wayland server - it's an X server that displays via Wayland
instead of directly on a graphics device.