[argyllcms] Re: dispwin sets the wrong X.org _ICC_PROFILE atom
- From: Elle Stone <ellestone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:55:22 -0500
On 11/16/2016 05:03 AM, Graeme Gill wrote:
Richard Hughes wrote:
About this; in the near future systems will be migrating from X11 to
Wayland (Fedora 25 already defaults to Wayland, other distros will
follow) and so setting X atoms is no longer going to work.
There's a lot of things that Wayland doesn't do yet, and lots
of applications that aren't going to be re-written anytime
soon, so X11 (or X11 built on top of Wayland) will be around
for a very long time.
XWayland (the compatibility "wrapper" that provides an isolated
xserver for the app) you can't use the root window as it's isolated
from the other windows.
Sounds like a compatibility bug in XWayland. To be useful
basic stuff like atom setting really needs to work.
I think most applications that want to know
what profile to use are now using either libcolord, or more commonly,
the colord DBus API.
I use a rather large set of very up-to-date Linux color-managed editing
applications, and colord/libcolord are not installed on my system. "Can
use" isn't the same as "must use".
I'm not sure how that will work for remote displays, so perhaps
libcolord or DBus isn't the right place to do color management
I don't think colord/libcolord should be *required* for setting the
system monitor profile whether under X, XWayland, or Wayland.
I run Gentoo Linux set up as a graphics workstation and configured to
not require colord. I set the X atom using dispwin in a "startx" script.
This makes it possible to change the installed system monitor profile
just by opening a terminal and typing a short command.
startx? I've tried using the GNOME and KDE desktops (and also XCFE,
Mate, LXDE, etc). Compared to a simple window manager such as IceWM,
these desktops "accomplish" two things: (1)They use more system
resources. (2)They slow down my workflow, requiring me to fight through
the UI to get to what I want to do next.
Hopefully even under Wayland I won't be required to use colord to set
the system monitor profile, and instead can continue using dispwin:
* dispwin makes it quick and simple to set and change the system
monitor profile at will.
* dispwin doesn't pull an EDID profile from my monitor and install
it without so much as even asking my permission or letting me know what
* dispwin doesn't tell me when my monitor profile is "outdated"
(thank you very much but I'm capable of deciding when to make a new
* dispwin doesn't try to manage my ICC profiles and doesn't put a
complicated UI between me and a simple thing like choosing an ICC profile.
It seems that colord is targetted at users who don't understand color
). But I don't
see how the described colord users can be expected to understand how to
use colord, and reading through the colord documentation and the
descriptions of actual colord users, two conclusions are hard to avoid:
* The typical colord user might process a few images, but isn't
sitting at a graphics workstation dedicated to image-making.
* The typical colord user requires access to a "Linux expert/system
administrator" to make color management decisions for them and to change
the colord settings.
Personally I'm putting off the switch to Wayland as long as possible.
But hopefully even under Wayland I'll be able to start my computer and
get to work without having to log in to a bloated desktop, and without
having to fight through layers of UI-based control apps to do something
I can do under X and IceWm just by opening a terminal and typing a
Other related posts: