Sway July 2020

sway@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
3 discussions

redshift wayland support
by Dominique Martinet 15 Mar '21

15 Mar '21

Hi all. I've joined the list at Dan's suggestion, as I will be maintaining waypipe[1] now, and admittedly it could be useful for sway users, so why not. [1] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe Looking at the SIG page[2] there is a wishlist item for "redshift with wayland support", and as a big user myself I would be all for it. [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Sway The problem is that upstream[3] has not been very active for a while - merged one PR in 2019, but that aside pretty much nothing since 2018. Frankly major DEs (gnome, KDE) incorporate the feature natively so users of redshift on wayland will basically only ever be wlroots-based compositors, so we shouldn't expect to get much help from anywhere on this... I imagine the dev uses gnome as he wrote the gnome-clock location helper redshift-gtk service files, so he's made the switch and hasn't looked back much. [3] https://github.com/jonls/redshift The wayland support issue[4] suggests arch uses minus7's wayland branch[5] but that would appear to still be AUR and they are in the same situation as us (some coprs have it alongside older versions of sway but nothing official). I would suggest the way forward would be to try to discuss with jonls and minus7 if an official fork could start somewhere; either minus7 tree if he is willing to do it or I suppose I could (I also have vested interest, I am also using the stdin remote control patches discussed on this issue[6], so "just" wayland wouldn't be enough for me, and whoever takes over would need to be willing to deal with at least accepting PRs :)) [4] https://github.com/jonls/redshift/issues/55 [5] https://github.com/minus7/redshift/tree/wayland [6] https://github.com/jonls/redshift/issues/690 So, what do you folks think? Worth a shot? Cheers, -- Dominique

2 1

sway 1.5 + wlroots 0.11 update
by Aleksei Bavshin 20 Jul '20

20 Jul '20

Hi all, There are two PRs with wlroots and sway update: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wlroots/pull-request/10 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sway/pull-request/9 A few things we'd want to deal with before merging and building those: 1) Wlroots update breaks API/ABI and all dependent packages should be fixed and rebuilt. 1.a) I already contacted wayfire upstream in IRC and Ilia said that they are thinking to publish a new 0.5.0 release in <= 2 weeks. Meanwhile I have a patch[2] (4 commits from git + meson.build update) which works right now. My testing was limited to starting wayfire with default config and clicking random buttons, but it looks like FreeBSD maintainer picked the same changes for their port. I can send a PR with the patch but it's a wayfire maintainer's decision whether to accept it or wait until the new upstream release. 1.b) For phoc, there's a WIP merge request[1] with update to the latest wlroots API. It would be awesome if someone of phoc maintainers could test the patched build and contact the upstream regarding the status of the merge request. For everyone's convenience, I prepared a copr repo with updated wlroots, sway, wayfire and phoc[3]. -- Now onto less important stuff. 2) F31 module update. Wlroots 0.11.0 requires wayland >= 1.18, but f31 has only 1.17. The (draft) policy for modularity[4] states that 'The module maintainer MUST have explicit commit privileges to all packages included in the module stream'. In essence that means we are not supposed to add `wayland` to the module. Also that means that if we don't convince wayland maintainer to update the package, we'll have to stop builds for f31. 3) F32 update. Considering that a) there are packages in f32 that would fail to install with sway module enabled, b) users are mostly unaware that we have the module and will resort to unofficial coprs (as observed multiple times on /r/Fedora), I'd like to see things updated in f32 non-modular. However with the involvement of other packages this might be troublesome. Is there any interest in f32 updates from other Sway SIG members and Mobility SIG (phoc/phosh owners)? [1] https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/phoc/-/merge_requests/153 [2] https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/alebastr/rpms/wayfire/c/adb25640 [3] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/alebastr/sway-testing/ [4] https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/docs/modularity/modularity/policies/ -- With best regards, Aleksei Bavshin

3 4

Re: Rebase of fmt to 7.0.0
by Dan Čermák 08 Jul '20

08 Jul '20

Hi list, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> writes: > Hello all. > > Fmt package will be rebased in Rawhide from version 6.2.1 to 7.0.0 next > week. > > This will include soversion bump from 6 to 7. All dependent packages > must be rebuilt. This affects us, at least waybar as far as I know depends on fmt. Cheers, Dan

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

Sway July 2020