The Great X11-to-Wayland Migration

AI-generated, human-reviewed. 

The Linux desktop is undergoing a massive transition that has been years in the making. The move from X11 to Wayland represents one of the most significant changes in how Linux handles graphics and windowing, but as recent discussions on the Untitled Linux Show reveal, this transition is far from smooth sailing.

X11's Security Nightmare Continues

The case for abandoning X11 grows stronger each week, with security researchers continuing to uncover decades-old vulnerabilities in the aging display server. In a recent episode of the Untitled Linux Show, host Rob Campbell highlighted six newly discovered CVEs affecting X11, including out-of-bounds access issues, integer overflows, and data leaks across various X11 extensions.

What makes these discoveries particularly concerning isn't just their severity, but their age. As one security researcher colorfully described the X11 codebase: it can best be characterized as "party like it's 1989." These aren't new problems—they're architectural issues baked into a system designed in an era when internet security was barely a consideration.

"X was developed at a time when Internet security and just overall security wasn't really much of a thing to be concerned about," Campbell noted during the show. The continuous discovery of these vulnerabilities underscores why the Linux community decided to start fresh with Wayland rather than attempting to patch a fundamentally insecure foundation.

The XLibre Fork: A Vote of No Confidence

When X11 development essentially stagnated, some community members launched XLibre as a fork to continue development. However, this effort has already shown troubling signs. As the hosts discussed, many X11 Libre commits have been reverted due to basic issues like improper handling of copyright and license notices, hardly confidence-inspiring for a project meant to maintain critical system infrastructure.

Even Phoronix's Michael Larabel has essentially issued a "vote of no confidence" by choosing not to cover XLibre developments, citing the inexperience of the team taking over such a complex codebase.

When Applications Push Back: The KiCad Controversy

Not everyone is embracing the Wayland transition with open arms. Ken McDonald brought up the case of KiCad, an open-source electronic design automation tool whose development team recently published a brutally honest blog post about their Wayland experience.

The KiCad team's assessment is blunt: while their application technically functions under Wayland, it suffers from "significant limitations and known issues that substantially degrade the user experience." They cite window management problems, input issues, performance instability, and dialogue limitations as major concerns.

What's particularly interesting about KiCad's position is their criticism of Wayland's design philosophy. The development team argues that Wayland deliberately omitted "basic functionality that desktop applications for X11, Windows and macOS have relied on for decades," such as window positioning and mouse cursor warping.

Their recommendation? "For now, if you need to use KiCad on Linux, use X11."

KDE's Pragmatic Middle Ground

While some applications struggle with Wayland, desktop environments are taking a more measured approach. Jonathan Bennett shared insights from KDE's Nate Graham, who outlined KDE's thoughtful strategy for the X11-to-Wayland transition.

KDE Plasma will continue maintaining X11 support, but with clear priorities:

• Critical "horribly broken" bugs will be fixed
• Very bad X11-specific regressions will probably be addressed eventually
• Less severe bugs likely won't be fixed without paid support
• New X11-specific features definitely won't be implemented without funding

Graham's data reveals that 73% of Plasma 6 users are already running Wayland sessions, with expectations that this percentage will climb as major distributions like Debian and Ubuntu LTS default to Wayland.

The Design Philosophy Conflict

The tension between KiCad and Wayland highlights a fundamental philosophical divide. Early Wayland development was driven by strong opinions about what should and shouldn't be included in a modern display server. Some of these decisions, as Bennett noted, have proven wrong over time.

"The Wayland team was shown the light by a sort of coalition of desktop environment folks," Bennett explained, mentioning that companies like Valve and organizations like KDE essentially threatened to fork Wayland if necessary changes weren't made. This pressure has led to many previously excluded features being added back to the Wayland protocol.

The Maintenance Reality

An often-overlooked aspect of this transition is who actually maintains X11 today. As Bennett pointed out, X11 only receives security updates because Red Hat still uses it and pays employees to fix issues. When Red Hat fully transitions away, X11 will become unmaintained community software; essentially maintained by volunteers with limited resources.

This reality makes the transition timeline clearer: X11 will continue receiving critical updates as long as major enterprise distributions depend on it, but new development has essentially ceased.

Looking Forward: A Decade-Long Transition

The hosts' predictions for the timeline are sobering but realistic. While Graham suggests KDE won't drop X11 support in the next one to two years, the broader consensus points to the end of the decade for complete transition.

Campbell offered perspective on this timeline: "Considering it's been around for almost 40 years, five years is soon." The transition away from such foundational technology naturally takes time, especially when compatibility and user experience are priorities.

The Pragmatic Path Forward

What emerges from these discussions is a picture of pragmatic, if sometimes grudging, progress. Desktop environments like KDE are threading the needle between innovation and compatibility. Applications like KiCad are holding their ground where Wayland doesn't yet meet their needs. Meanwhile, security researchers continue highlighting why this transition is necessary, even if it's taking longer than anyone hoped.

The Linux community's approach (allowing for parallel development and gradual migration rather than forced adoption) may be frustrating for those eager to see X11 disappear, but it's probably the most realistic path for such a fundamental change.

As Bennett concluded in the discussion: "Long transitions are tough but ultimately it's worth it to get something better in the end."

Want to hear the full discussion about X11, Wayland, and the future of Linux desktop graphics? Listen to the complete episode of the Untitled Linux Show for more insights from Jonathan Bennett, Rob Campbell, and Ken McDonald, plus their take on other Linux developments including office suites, kernel drama, and open source updates. For ad-free and video podcast feeds, subscribe to Club TWiT.