Bug 438294 - [Wayland] Scroll speed varies within applications
Summary: [Wayland] Scroll speed varies within applications
Status: RESOLVED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: kwin
Classification: Plasma
Component: libinput (show other bugs)
Version: 5.22.0
Platform: Neon Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: KWin default assignee
URL: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG...
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2021-06-08 21:24 UTC by Jeffrey Bouter
Modified: 2021-06-10 08:31 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jeffrey Bouter 2021-06-08 21:24:48 UTC
SUMMARY

The scrolling speed within applications (using a touchpad) varies hugely. System settings, for example, has a very slow scroll speed. Whereas Firefox has a very fast scroll speed.


STEPS TO REPRODUCE
1. Use a wayland session
2. Use a touchpad for scrolling
3. Try scrolling in different applications and observe the difference

OBSERVED RESULT

Scroll speed/sensitivity varies within applications

EXPECTED RESULT

Scroll speed to be the same in all applications

SOFTWARE/OS VERSIONS
Linux/KDE Plasma: KDE Neon
(available in About System)
KDE Plasma Version: 5.22.0
KDE Frameworks Version: 5.82.0
Qt Version: 5.15.3

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Comment 1 Nate Graham 2021-06-09 23:17:53 UTC
Firefox does scrolling its own special way that only it controls; if you find it unpleasantly different from other apps, you'll need to go bug the Firefox people about it.

Slow scrolling in QtQuick-based apps is actually the intended speed according to the Qt developers, and the fact that it's faster on X11 is a bug; see https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-56075.

In the Plasma Wayland session, you can increase the scroll speed if you want, though.
Comment 2 Jeffrey Bouter 2021-06-10 08:31:04 UTC
So in order to get pleasant scrolling in Wayland on plasma, I'll have to accept that Firefox races through? That's too bad. Thanks for your reply, Nate!