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.

  • Aganim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Maybe you shouldn’t take your experience from 5 years ago and apply now. Wayland is solid and so is Btrfs.

    My 2 year old AMD-based laptop begs to differ. X11 is rock-solid, whereas Wayland locks up completely on a regular basis, without producing any useful logging. Every so often I try it to see if things have gotten better, but until today unfortunately not. Personally I prefer X11, I need to perform work on my Linux machine, not spend time debugging a faulty compositor, protocol or wherever the problem lies.

    • loutr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Wayland itself can’t crash, it’s just a set of protocol specs. The implementation you’re using (gnome/KDE/wlroots…) does. Obviously this doesn’t solve your problem as an end-user, just saying that this particular issue isn’t to blame on Wayland in itself.

      • Aganim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Fine, in that case both Gnome and KDE handle the Wayland protocol in a crappy manner on my hardware. As the end-user I don’t care: I have no issues with KDE and Gnome on X11, when using the Wayland protocol they are unstable. For my use-case X11 is the better choice , as using the Wayland protocol comes with issues and does not provide any benefits over X11.

        • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          @Aganim @loutr This makes sense, these people that have some irrational emotion attachment to Wayland in spite of it’s lack of functionality, do not. Now, if they have a use case that makes sense to them, they’re playing a game that needs 200fps, then fine, but if the use case doesn’t fit then don’t use it.

        • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          @possiblylinux127 @loutr I like to get work done, some tools are helpful to that end, Rust for example, superior to C in as much as it makes it much more difficult to make mistakes with memory allocation without resorting to the grossness of garbage collection, but when new things only detract from work flow, then yea I prefer the older things that work. When new things benefit it, Rust for example, or the latest kernels in terms of efficiency, then I use them. I don’t like change for changes sake, I like change when it improves things, in my use case, Wayland does not do that.

    • lastweakness@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      This sounds like a driver issue or something if all desktops are breaking for you. Have you tried reporting it anywhere?

      • Aganim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        The problem is, I wouldn’t know what to report and where. I’ve never been able to find any relevant logging, neither in /var/log nor in journalctl. I doubt opening an issue with ‘desktop locks up randomly when using Wayland’ is really useful without any logging. And where would I do that? At the Wayland bug tracker? Gnome or KDE? Kernel, as it indeed might be a driver issue? And there is of course the time component: I use my laptop for work, so I simply cannnot spend hours on debugging this. That’s time I don’t have, I’m afraid.