this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

Emacs

313 readers
2 users here now

A community for the timeless and infinitely powerful editor. Want to see what Emacs is capable of?!

Get Emacs

Rules

  1. Posts should be emacs related
  2. Be kind please
  3. Yes, we already know: Google results for "emacs" and "vi" link to each other. We good.

Emacs Resources

Emacs Tutorials

Useful Emacs configuration files and distributions

Quick pain-saver tip

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rglullis
raphael
3
Emacs natively on Wayland (PGTK) is slower than on Xwayland (Lucid) Also fonts are not looking good on both (but good on X). (alien.top)
submitted 1 year ago by Ybenel@alien.top to c/emacs
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have rebuilt Emacs 29 with PGTK in order to get Emacs running natively and to fix the fonts, and i already have another emacs 29 build (Lucid) installed with i use On X.
I was surprised to see Emacs on wayland was running slower than its counterpart on Xwayland. Also the fonts issue was not fixed.
While zooming in makes the fonts look better. On X i don't have this issue.
Below is screenshots of fonts on Wayland - Xwayland and X

​

On wayland (PGTK)

​

Xwayland (Lucid)

​

Xorg (Lucid)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rileyrgham@alien.top 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Recently I was reading #emacs and saw that some claim pgtk, or native wayland, is bodged and not feature complete. Is that right? If so, which is the best toolkit to compile from source with to run under XWayland?

[–] 7890yuiop@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The author of the emacs pgtk code says that no one who has X installed should use pgtk -- he's stated on several occasions that if you have X at all then you should use a supported X toolkit in Emacs for best results.

I've seen counter-arguments that pgtk is still beneficial if you happen to have a "high DPI display", but I believe that's the only argument I've ever seen for using pgtk under X.

I always build --with-x-toolkit=lucid myself, and can happily vouch for that one. I don't use Wayland, though.

[–] Thaodan@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

The issue is that the pure GTK port doesn't have those functions that are based on Xlib such as frame properties that come from X11. Some feature specific to X11 that can be implemented purely with GTK are not implemented such as outer window id's (I have a patch for that). So in theory the pure GTK windowing system could replace the GTK with X11 calls if it optionally allows the call of functions that depend on X11 if requested.

Pure GTK also allows the use of GTK input methods besides the better high dpi scaling.

[–] Thaodan@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

It's feature complete but limited because Wayland is limited.

For example there's no way for Emacs to know which frames are currently visible.

load more comments (1 replies)