Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 97

Thread: Ubuntu Allegedly To Have Its Own X, Wayland Alternative

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Then see whats left.
    There'd hardly be any X left, so... W-light Server?

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobu View Post
    There'd hardly be any X left, so... W-light Server?
    Then so be it.
    Just strip out everything that can be stripped out, and if all GTK and Qt applications still work, and almost nothing of X is left, then that is just good, right?

    Then the codebase will be smaller, it will be easier to maintain, quicker to compile, easier to fix bugs, and everything will be great.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Once Wayland is accepted and is good working order, I agree a X11 lite would be nice. But instead of lite, you could call it X11 Legacy server. Basically stripped down to a really easy to support portion of X11 for applications and drivers from the last few years(aka no older drivers or applcations), for use ONLY in wayland as a server. That way people can have thier X11 for things that just won't be ported EVER, but its not has hard to maintain over time. X11 development could be entirely dropped except for yearly updates once X11 legacy server was in working order.

    Of coarse, this means there would be 3 servers be maintained, so I have no idea if this would ACTUALLY save people effort, but its a pretty idea.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Then so be it.
    Just strip out everything that can be stripped out, and if all GTK and Qt applications still work, and almost nothing of X is left, then that is just good, right?

    Then the codebase will be smaller, it will be easier to maintain, quicker to compile, easier to fix bugs, and everything will be great.
    As I understand it Xorg had when it was as biggest almost a million lines code, if I remember phoronix article right wayland has around ten thousands line ( in the middle of 2012).
    Xorg light need to be very light if it should get that small. How big is the refactoring work that is needed to do something like that?



    By the way, its look like Arch linux has wayland in their regular package repositories now.
    Last edited by Akka; 02-11-2013 at 10:07 AM.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Then so be it.
    Just strip out everything that can be stripped out, and if all GTK and Qt applications still work, and almost nothing of X is left, then that is just good, right?

    Then the codebase will be smaller, it will be easier to maintain, quicker to compile, easier to fix bugs, and everything will be great.
    There are applications like rxvt-unicode, which don't use GTK or Qt.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dh04000 View Post
    Once Wayland is accepted and is good working order, I agree a X11 lite would be nice. But instead of lite, you could call it X11 Legacy server. Basically stripped down to a really easy to support portion of X11 for applications and drivers from the last few years(aka no older drivers or applcations), for use ONLY in wayland as a server. That way people can have thier X11 for things that just won't be ported EVER, but its not has hard to maintain over time. X11 development could be entirely dropped except for yearly updates once X11 legacy server was in working order.

    Of coarse, this means there would be 3 servers be maintained, so I have no idea if this would ACTUALLY save people effort, but its a pretty idea.
    But Solaris and BSD use X.org Server too.
    So even without Wayland, we should still trim down X.org Server and rip away all stuff we don't need.


    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    There are applications like rxvt-unicode, which don't use GTK or Qt.
    Yes, and those applications should still work too.
    But there are lots of other cruft that we don't need to support, such as glyphs and drawing operations.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,559

    Default

    I think the biggest weakness regarding Linux display services is the fact that proprietary video drivers are almost an afterthought. It seems that Wayland is going to continue the tradition, though I guess most of it is license related so there's not much that can be done anyway.

    But Android pulled it off pretty well.

    And maybe this is what Canonical is focusing on with their own implementation (should it come about), because they know they'll finally have to get real with video drivers if they want to enter the phone market.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    I think the biggest weakness regarding Linux display services is the fact that proprietary video drivers are almost an afterthought. It seems that Wayland is going to continue the tradition, though I guess most of it is license related so there's not much that can be done anyway.

    But Android pulled it off pretty well.

    And maybe this is what Canonical is focusing on with their own implementation (should it come about), because they know they'll finally have to get real with video drivers if they want to enter the phone market.
    Yes and no. DRI3 is working on allowing multiple OpenGL implementations to be installed at once so you could have both Radeon and Catalyst installed at once and switch between them with a reboot. There's nothing in Wayland that says "No closed source drivers!" All wayland does is stake pointers and buffers and displays their contents. Anything BEFORE the buffer, such as how that buffer got filled or who wrote to it, is a client problem with the one exception that Wayland will not allow programs to write to (or read?) eachother's buffers. If you need to share buffers you need to do shared memory or ideally, DMA-BUF

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akka View Post
    As I understand it Xorg had when it was as biggest almost a million lines code, if I remember phoronix article right wayland has around ten thousands line ( in the middle of 2012).
    Xorg light need to be very light if it should get that small. How big is the refactoring work that is needed to do something like that?



    By the way, its look like Arch linux has wayland in their regular package repositories now.

    There about, Daniel's video on Xorg -> Wayland quoted 900k though he said at one time he could've sworn that he saw 1.2Million. A lot of that was because in order to be platform-agnostic X had to do a lot of things that are now handled by other programs. For example, once upon a time Xorg had an entire printer server & stack built in because at the time none of the unix's had a standarized way to do printing, now we have CUPS and Samba but at the time it was needed. (Yes that got removed awhile back, Daniel said it was the largest, single, code purge in X's history lol)

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Yes, and those applications should still work too.
    But there are lots of other cruft that we don't need to support, such as glyphs and drawing operations.
    Text rendering shouldn't be removed as it is accelerated by graphics card.
    rxvt-unicode won't work without XDraw* functions.

Posting Permissions

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