Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Wayland Display Server Gets A Terminal

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,240

    Default Wayland Display Server Gets A Terminal

    Phoronix: Wayland Display Server Gets A Terminal

    A month ago we talked about Red Hat's Wayland Project, which is a nano display server with integrated compositing manager that is much simpler than the long-standing X Server. Today this project has released a new milestone: Wayland gets a terminal. The Wayland project is led by Kristian Høgsberg and recently he's been attempting to get a full-screen X Server running within Wayland...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4

    Default Precision

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Wayland Display Server Gets A Terminal

    A month ago we talked about Red Hat's Wayland Project, which is a nano display server with integrated compositing manager that is much simpler than the long-standing X Server. Today this project has released a new milestone: Wayland gets a terminal. The Wayland project is led by Kristian Høgsberg and recently he's been attempting to get a full-screen X Server running within Wayland...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NjkxMg
    As Kristian Hgsberg says here , the project is not a Red Hat's project. But he still working there.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    37

    Default Is Wayland really an X server?

    What I mean by that question is whether Wayland is (or intended to be) compatible with the protocol between X Server and X Client or not.

    If it is, then why do we need another GTK backend? Won't the normal X backend work? Won't normal X clients be compatible with Wayland?

    If it isn't, then stop calling it an X server. It would be a totally new protocol that's incompatible with X protocol.

    Please note that my usage of the word "X" doesn't refer to any particular implementation of X like X.Org or XFree86. I'm talking about the X protocol.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BhaKi View Post
    What I mean by that question is whether Wayland is (or intended to be) compatible with the protocol between X Server and X Client or not.

    If it is, then why do we need another GTK backend? Won't the normal X backend work? Won't normal X clients be compatible with Wayland?

    If it isn't, then stop calling it an X server. It would be a totally new protocol that's incompatible with X protocol.

    Please note that my usage of the word "X" doesn't refer to any particular implementation of X like X.Org or XFree86. I'm talking about the X protocol.
    What I understood, is that Wayland doesn't "speek" X protocol. It's a local display server for everybody PC. Once an X server run on top of wayland (as a wayland client), then any X clients could run on wayland (using GTK, QT, ...).
    Porting GTK to wayland allowed GTK client to run without the X Server layer.

    I admit than if the rootless X server run on top of wayland, may be it's not necessary to port GTK. Maybe it has something to do with client rendering. Don't know.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •