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.

  • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    tbh the situation with Wayland was not too different, and wouldn’t have been better. Compared to Wayland, brtfs dodged a bullet. Overhyped, oversold, overcrowdsourced, literally years behind the system it was supposed to “replace” when it was thrown into production. To this day, wayland can’t even complete a full desktop session login on my machine.

    So, if you ask me, btrfs should *definitively not * have been Wayland! Can you imagine if btrfs had launched on Fedora, and then you formatted your partition as btrfs to install Linux, but the installer could not install into it? “brtfs reports a writer is not available”, says the installer. You go to the forums to ask what’s going on, why the brtfs does not work. The devs of brtfs respond with “oh it’s just a protocol; everyone who wants to write files into our new partition format have to implement a writer themselves”.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Clearly you have had some bad experiences

      Maybe you shouldn’t take your experience from 5 years ago and apply now. Wayland is solid and so is Btrfs. I know that because people use both.

      I was mostly curious about btrfs with raid 1 on Proxmox but my doubts have been answered.

      • Except: I try Wayland every 6 months or so and still have problems with it.

        Wayland’s problem isn’t Wayland; it’s all of the stuff that needs to work in Wayland that doesn’t. Using Wayland, to me, feels like using Windows, out a Mac: as long as you don’t stray out of the playground, it’s mostly fine (if a bit slow). As soon as you try to do any outside-the-box setup, like changing the status bar, things start getting all f’ed up. Like, last time I tried, I couldn’t get DPI font scaling to work - fonts would either be too small everywhere, or big in most apps but really tiny in the status bar. Whenever I encounter things like this, I search for solutions for, maybe an hour, see that other people have the same problem and there’s no fix yet, and bail back to X11, which Just Works.

        Also, while I know some people have had bad experiences with btrfs, I’ve been using it for years. I originally switched because I had multiple separate cases of data loss using ext4, across different systems. It’s always baffled me that folks complain about btrfs, but ext4 was far less reliably. IME.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          It is a protocol not a display manager. The desktop runs everything and the apps connect to it.

          Network was never part of the design and never will be

          • Nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            @possiblylinux127 Yes idiots keep touting it as a replacement for Xorg which IS a networking display and that is a feature I need, and I suspect if more people knew how to use it they’d also need it.

            • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              I think most people aren’t living in the past. What is your use case exactly? What do you need a remote GUI for? RDP and other protocols exist and are much better especially in terms of performance.

              • Nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 hours ago

                @possiblylinux127 Again rdp, vnc, x2go, ONLY work for full desktops, they do not work for individual applications. If I’ve got a terminal session into a server and decide I want to fire up synaptic, X does that for me, Wayland doesn’t and the overhead of starting an entire desktop to run a single app for a few minutes does not make sense.

                • cakeistheanswer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  Hey holy shit! Someone else who knows this is in there! Two of us!

                  I got around this just using a local IPC on whichever box and a wlroots compositor (I think river right now? They’re all tiny). Wezterm is just locked in a remote multi plexed session I can fire scripts from the one with a keyboard. Startup isn’t really noticeable in wasted time, but it isn’t nothing. Consider this a promise to circle back if I do find something, it would have been a pain in the ass at another job.

                  Broadly I think it’s funny a lot of the same people who taught me the Unix philosophy don’t seem to understand the irony of refusing to move from the monolith. (Not that that’s you specifically, but Wayland actually gets it right for the most part).

                  The defense you hear from people like me is less fingers in ears that there are problems, and more the response to people who have tried nothing and are out of ideas on how to arrive at the same place differently. Im currently doing several things I was AGGRESSIVELY informed were impossible and wouldn’t ever be, but there’s so few people using some of the functionality in xorg I wonder if its back to hacking things together with pipes and scripts for the niches, remote display pretty much has been superseded by the common web server.

                  I started IT hearing stories of migrations back and forth from xorg/plan 9, and I did some of the troubleshooting in the early xorg era. you can trust me or not when I say I will choose the situation with xorg/Wayland now infinity times over that.

                • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 hours ago

                  And there is were the community has kind diverged. Now days it is either headless servers or desktops.

                  Running individual apps is interesting but I am afraid that it is not super practical in 2024. However, there is this: https://github.com/udevbe/greenfield

                  Xorg is no longer being maintained for the most part and because the code base is so large there isn’t anyone who understands the codebase. I still use it for my semi virtual PC as Xorg allows for a lot more flexibility than Wayland plus Xfce4 isn’t completely ported yet. There will be a day when I move completely though. Probably when Xfce4 is Wayland native.

      • Aganim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours 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
          4
          ·
          8 hours 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
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours 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
              3
              ·
              7 hours 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.

          • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            This feels more like long time Linux guy digging in there heals because they like the old days

            • Nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 hours 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
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours 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
            3
            ·
            7 hours 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.