Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New X.Org Server 1.13 RC Bumps The ABI

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

  • New X.Org Server 1.13 RC Bumps The ABI

    Phoronix: New X.Org Server 1.13 RC Bumps The ABI

    Keith Packard released the X.Org Server 1.12.99.905 release on Tuesday, another release candidate of the forthcoming xorg-server 1.13...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE2NTM

  • #2
    xwayland

    Go work on Xwayland!
    Merge Xwayland!
    Improve Xwayland!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by uid313 View Post
      Go work on Xwayland!
      Merge Xwayland!
      Improve Xwayland!
      Waiting eagerly for your patch submission and pull request.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by alanc View Post
        Waiting eagerly for your patch submission and pull request.
        I was just wondering, what does Sun developers work on X?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
          I was just wondering, what does Sun developers work on X?
          I can't quite figure out what you're trying to ask - are you trying to ask what parts of X do Sun developers (now Oracle developers, though phoronix hasn't retagged me yet) work on? You can easily see in the git logs (or Michael's articles about once or twice a year summarizing who contributes to X.Org code bases) contributions to the core server, clients, libraries, protocol specifications, documentation, and a few drivers (especially keyboard and mouse, since we're one of the OS'es that still use those instead of evdev). Oh, and we also contribute to running the X.Org Foundation - I've been a board member for 3.5 years now, 2 of which as secretary, and Stuart has been a board member & treasurer for much longer than that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by alanc View Post
            I can't quite figure out what you're trying to ask - are you trying to ask what parts of X do Sun developers (now Oracle developers, though phoronix hasn't retagged me yet) work on? You can easily see in the git logs (or Michael's articles about once or twice a year summarizing who contributes to X.Org code bases) contributions to the core server, clients, libraries, protocol specifications, documentation, and a few drivers (especially keyboard and mouse, since we're one of the OS'es that still use those instead of evdev). Oh, and we also contribute to running the X.Org Foundation - I've been a board member for 3.5 years now, 2 of which as secretary, and Stuart has been a board member & treasurer for much longer than that.
            Thanks!
            Yeah, that's what I was asking about.

            Have Sun/Oracle contributed anything cool or noteworthy to X.org, or just some minor boring fixes?
            What are Oracle working on atm for Xorg?

            Will the Solaris Trusted Extensions security module which uses XACE ever be done?
            We've heard about it for years, but it seems it never comes.

            Also are they working to run X.org without superuser root privileges?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Thanks!
              Have Sun/Oracle contributed anything cool or noteworthy to X.org, or just some minor boring fixes?
              Yes, release management, docs, and bug fixes are boring. Sorry that our management and customers are interested in software that works and they can figure out how to use rather than exciting shiny bling.

              Though I am biased to think that extending xhost to allow user-based authentication was pretty cool.

              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Will the Solaris Trusted Extensions security module which uses XACE ever be done?
              We've heard about it for years, but it seems it never comes.
              Have you? I really didn't think most people noticed or cared, especially those running Xorg on non-Solaris kernels who can't use it - the port has been done for years, open sourced, and shipped in OpenSolaris and now Solaris, but really needs some API changes made to core Xorg before it can go upstream, which I've never had time to get to because I wasted too much time on things that benefited users of all platforms instead, such as bug fixes, documentation updates and pushing out releases.
              Of course, I did do the preliminary steps of getting the XACE api's integrated into the master branch of Xorg so we could go forward, which allowed the SELinux support to come in as well.

              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Also are they working to run X.org without superuser root privileges?
              We've been shipping Xorg in Solaris for years that drops superuser privileges after initialization, but making it run without root ever would basically involve changing our kernel to handle those tasks instead, which would be great for us, and boring to people using other kernels.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by alanc View Post
                Of course, I did do the preliminary steps of getting the XACE api's integrated into the master branch of Xorg so we could go forward, which allowed the SELinux support to come in as well.
                Cool!
                Does X.org on Linux support SELinux?

                Originally posted by alanc View Post
                We've been shipping Xorg in Solaris for years that drops superuser privileges after initialization, but making it run without root ever would basically involve changing our kernel to handle those tasks instead, which would be great for us, and boring to people using other kernels.
                Cool!
                Why doesn't X.org on Linux drop superuser privileges after initialization?
                Can you please make it do? That would be awesome!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                  Cool!
                  Does X.org on Linux support SELinux?
                  Yes, since Xorg 1.6 in 2009.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                    Why doesn't X.org on Linux drop superuser privileges after initialization?
                    Can you please make it do? That would be awesome!
                    The real showstopper at the moment is the lack of revoke() support in the kernel. Without that, your input devices are wide open to pretty much anyone at all times.

                    Alan's already done a hell of a lot for X (and most of it utterly thankless yet totally essential work) over the last god-knows-how-many years, so I'm not sure why you're heckling him at all. What have you done to improve X/Wayland?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by daniels View Post
                      The real showstopper at the moment is the lack of revoke() support in the kernel. Without that, your input devices are wide open to pretty much anyone at all times.
                      Why isn't revoke() in the kernel?
                      Have anyone talked about it on LKML?
                      Has anyone submitted a patch that implements revoke()?

                      Originally posted by daniels View Post
                      Alan's already done a hell of a lot for X (and most of it utterly thankless yet totally essential work) over the last god-knows-how-many years, so I'm not sure why you're heckling him at all. What have you done to improve X/Wayland?
                      I didn't mean to hack on Alan.
                      I haven't contributed anything, he have contributed and that is cool!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Foot-in-mouth syndrome sucks, doesn't it?

                        Thanks to both of you for making the Linux desktop what it is today. And I'm sure a lot of other work that may not be flashy but is important and formative. We are truly standing on the shoulders of giants.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                          Why isn't revoke() in the kernel?
                          Have anyone talked about it on LKML?
                          Has anyone submitted a patch that implements revoke()?
                          Yeah, it's been discussed on and off for several years, but is really hard to implement, especially in the presence of mmap()ed files. At the moment the current best suggestion is an input-specific revoke(), but no-one's managed to write and submit a patch implementing that which would be accepted.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by daniels View Post
                            Yeah, it's been discussed on and off for several years, but is really hard to implement, especially in the presence of mmap()ed files. At the moment the current best suggestion is an input-specific revoke(), but no-one's managed to write and submit a patch implementing that which would be accepted.
                            Then how did other operating systems with support for revoke() manage to implement it?
                            I assume Solaris support revoke()?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                              Then how did other operating systems with support for revoke() manage to implement it?
                              I assume Solaris support revoke()?
                              From the looks of things, Solaris supports vhangup(), which is TTY-specific, and it doesn't have a general-purpose revoke() either.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X