Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

X.Org 7.5 Released. Wait, Nope!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • X.Org 7.5 Released. Wait, Nope!

    Phoronix: X.Org 7.5 Released. Wait, Nope!

    Today X.Org 7.5 with X Server 1.7 is scheduled to be released, per the release schedule that Daniel Stone proposed earlier this year. X Server 1.7 includes X Input 2 (a.k.a. Input Hotness) and Multi-Pointer X is now enabled by default (it has been in the master branch for about a year, but it has been disabled due to X Input 2 missing). This key piece to the open-source Linux desktop also features E-EDID support, the X Server no longer needing to symlink to Mesa sources, and a horde of bug-fixes. Aside from an updated X Server, X.Org 7.5 will include various updates to different input and graphics drivers.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=13658

  • #2
    i just hope that X will die soon and all the operating systems depending on it will migrate to Wayland


    (yeah right)

    Comment


    • #3
      It's a pity that such a key piece of the free desktop continues to have manpower troubles...

      Comment


      • #4
        Yeah, it is.

        But it also most be ridiculously hard to help contribute to it. Even using their API is a horrifying experience (no documentation whatsoever and such a weird, big, and complex format).

        Comment


        • #5
          bashing does not change anything

          @phoronix: I don't see what all that bashing between the lines is good for.
          Yes, Xorg has a hard time because of the lack of manpower, but instead of complaining all the time, why don't you help and start a call for developers?


          @89c51: The question is what would you gain from switching to something different. What do you dislike about X, except they have manpower shortage? After all, most of the problems I experience are not design issues - they could be adressed with much less effort than rewriting the whole thing.

          After all, you have to find people who develop Wayland as far as needed to be useable. Given the lack of Xorg devs I doubt this will happen anytime soon.

          - Clemens

          Comment


          • #6
            I still think Xorg always sucked and will always suck.. Apple should open source Quartz and we would all be happy.. Or, as I'm on dreamland today, X could just die as someone appear with something so awesome that put Quartz on its knees

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Linuxhippy View Post
              @phoronix: I don't see what all that bashing between the lines is good for.
              Yes, Xorg has a hard time because of the lack of manpower, but instead of complaining all the time, why don't you help and start a call for developers?
              Bashing? I am not trying to bash them at all. This article in fact is to expose the situation and make it very clear and is to call out for developers and helpers, hence all of the text referring to companies that contribute, things other people can do, etc.
              Michael Larabel
              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Linuxhippy View Post
                @phoronix: I don't see what all that bashing between the lines is good for.
                Yes, Xorg has a hard time because of the lack of manpower, but instead of complaining all the time, why don't you help and start a call for developers?


                @89c51: The question is what would you gain from switching to something different. What do you dislike about X, except they have manpower shortage? After all, most of the problems I experience are not design issues - they could be adressed with much less effort than rewriting the whole thing.

                After all, you have to find people who develop Wayland as far as needed to be useable. Given the lack of Xorg devs I doubt this will happen anytime soon.

                - Clemens
                I always heard X have an archaic and non inviting code base.. How the hell that would be good for new developers wanting to contribute?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Linuxhippy View Post
                  The question is what would you gain from switching to something different. What do you dislike about X, except they have manpower shortage? After all, most of the problems I experience are not design issues - they could be adressed with much less effort than rewriting the whole thing.

                  After all, you have to find people who develop Wayland as far as needed to be useable. Given the lack of Xorg devs I doubt this will happen anytime soon.
                  Restarting with a much more smaller and cleaner code base seems to have given KDE's desktop shell a new life... much more developers seems to be contributing to Plasma rather than the old KDesktop and development pace seems to be much quicker.
                  At first probably you'll miss the 20 years of features implemented in X, but what's good about Wayland is that you can run X in it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by puelocesar View Post
                    X could just die as someone appear with something so awesome that put Quartz on its knees
                    1. XOrg is far more than graphics
                    2. Could you explain how Quartz is so much different compared to XRender?

                    I have to agree about the quite ugly code-base, I don't want to predict how a re-write would look like once its has all the features people *depend* on.

                    - Clemens
                    Last edited by Linuxhippy; 04-01-2009, 09:05 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @Linuxhippy: Have a better method to attract developers to Xorg?

                      Share the secret...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Linuxhippy View Post
                        I have to agree about the quite ugly code-base, I don't want to predict how a re-write would look like once its has all the features people *depend* on.

                        - Clemens
                        i think (and i might be very wrong) that the only thing that people will depend -and wayland doesn't have- is network transparency



                        probably there are more things missing right now but as far as i understand it this is what requires the most work


                        @Michael

                        What about an interview with Kristian on Wayland and stuff ???

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Another april's fools joke could be : UT3 is out for linux and Epic will open-source their engine.
                          ATI, partnership with Epic, issue the same day a fglrx 9.4 that fully corrects all the bugs remaining (no video tearing, +20% performance in OpenGl) and the Xfi drivers are now open-sourced as well by creative to give a real AAAAA game enjoyement to linux users...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            It must die or it must be rewritten from the ground up. The code is huge and ugly and contributing is almost impossible because of the lack of documentation. Now it comes the lack of manpower.
                            ¿What about starting from an implementation of XRender that actually accelerates (instead of decelerating) the rendering? ¿Have you seen that QT 4.5 using raster rendering (software) is much much faster than using native rendering (XRender)? ¿Is it so difficult to have simple alpha blending without hardware acceleration in a 2GH+ machine? Most of the simple effects in Mac OS X like translucency work at full speed without hardware acceleration. Windows had Alpha Blending since Windows 2000 and it was quick even without hardware acceleration. ¿Why then Xorg needs a full 3D graphic card just to let a window know what is behind it? ¿Why does Xorg feel so slow compared to OSX and Windows even with the fastest graphic card?

                            ¿Can you solve all these problems with Xorg keeping the 20 years old code while solving in a small amount of time the future challenges that may arise in the near future? In the past Xfree didn't keep up with the rest of the graphic systems and, although Xorg implemented some of these features that were missing for long, they are implemented in a slow, semi working fashion.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The way I see it, X.org is still suffering from a "monolithic" hangover. The code is hard to understand, and the system is hopelessly complex, only exacerbated by the arcane entanglement of video drivers as we've come to know them. To come in as even an experienced programmer and attempt to work on X.org, you'd probably need a good year to even begin to get on your feet in a meaningful way, even after its modular breakdown.

                              And the documentation is spotty and hard to follow, as I recall it, so that doesn't help either. I understand very well that good documentation is hard to write, especially on something as huge as an X implementation, but you call it like you see it, no?

                              EDIT: Oh wow, I start typing, get distracted for half an hour, finish my post, and in the meantime a bunch of people have declared, in no uncertain terms, exactly what I said. That's actually really depressing...
                              Last edited by Wyatt; 04-01-2009, 10:38 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X