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

Emacs

311 readers
1 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@communick.news
raphael@communick.news
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@communick.news
20 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 (4 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?

[–] 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 (3 replies)