Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We Have Mir & Wayland, But There Still Could Be X12

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    It is a conflict of interest,
    It's only a conflict of interest, if it can be shown that Intel controls Wayland development, and has the power to make decisions on features/policy, veto commits etc. Do you have evidence of this being the case? How many Intel employees are actively contributing to Wayland, and have influence to the development direction of it? Is it a majority? Do they have authority over other Wayland developers?

    but I do not care enough about Wayland to track its development to catch these things.
    So, you just make unfounded assumptions about how Wayland development is being directed?

    The closest of which I am aware is an incident where Intel reverted a commit to support Canonical's Mir from their driver; it had the side effect of pushing people toward the technologies that they are using in Mir. Clearly, they have a bias.
    I don't see why it should be Intel's - or indeed anyone's except Canonical's - job to maintain support for Mir, which is Canonical's private one-distro solution. If I write my own "Peace" display server that only runs in my own FooBuntu distro, which is only used by me, is Intel showing "bias" by not implementing and maintaining support for it in their drivers?

    Anyway, the converse question is do you know of any cases where Wayland's development has compromised Tizen's development goals. I cannot imagine an executive at Intel letting that happen (at least not without firing people).
    Well, that question is flawed. Firstly, the absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence, so even if I don't know of any such cases, that alone doesn't mean they don't exist.

    Secondly, I don't really see how there could be anything about Wayland development that would compromise Tizen's development goals. Seeing that Wayland is an extensible protocol (like OpenGL) and that it's built in a way that it can be adapted to be used in many use cases (mobile, desktop, etc.) and that it's open source, seems to me like there's not very much the Wayland devs could do to make it go against Tizen's development goals.

    Thirdly, it still hasn't been shown that Intel has such control over Wayland (I don't think it does) that it could simply decide what it "lets happen" within Wayland development.

    A while back, I read comment by Kristian H?gsberg that stated what he was doing with Wayland could have been an X11 extension, but it would have left the rest of the X server inert. In the extreme case, it is not hard to imagine an extension that encapsulates a new protocol inside of the existing X11 protocol. It has been a while and I can no longer find it, but your own comments seem to corroborate my recollection. From what you say, it seems clear that this could have been done with X11 (much like web 2.0 can be done with HTTP), but it would not have been done how you would like.
    Sure, you could probably attach the Wayland protocol into X, and teach the X server to speak Wayland, if that's what you want - but why? Presumably, the composition, IPC, etc. would all still be done by X, so this would solve exactly none of the problems of X, just add another extension to the already bloated monstrosity. And it would accomplish none of the goals of Wayland, making it an excercise in futility.

    Anyway, I have repeatedly said that it is okay for people to go off and do their own thing. I just don't think that reinventing the wheel merits hype.
    Well, in the link I posted were listed some pretty good reasons why Wayland is needed, and why it's a good thing to replace X. I don't think it's reinventing the wheel, it's more like replacing something that is outdated and is no longer suitable for modern needs. Getting rid of legacy cruft. I think some hype is warranted for a solution that is beneficial and solves many problems that haven't been possible to solve otherwise.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by ryao View Post
      It seems we are in the same boat. I just ran `nvidia-settings -a InitialPixmapPlacement=4` (the default on my system is 2) on my system and restarted Xorg. 2D performance seems better, but it could just be the placebo effect. You might want to try that out too. I found that setting after doing a quick google search for "nvidia linux driver 2d performance". The meaning of the values is documented in the source:



      I also found another setting that I plan to try out:

      http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree8...ixmapCacheSize
      Thanks for that, I'll check it out.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by dee. View Post
        So, you just make unfounded assumptions about how Wayland development is being directed?
        They are founded on the belief that no company would play such a role in software without ensuring that it works well with their other stuff first. It is a rather sensible thing to believe. The only company of which I am aware that failed to do this was Sun Microsystems with the Lustre Filesystem.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by dee. View Post
          Thanks for that, I'll check it out.
          I edited my post to say the following around the time you posted this:

          Originally posted by ryao View Post
          Edit: It turns out that it was either the placebo effect or the effect of a freshly started Xorg server. That setting does not persist across Xorg sessions. :/
          Anyway, if you find a setting that helps (that for some reason is not the default), please let me know. I would be interested,

          On a related note, I noticed that 2D performance from the Nvidia blob on Solaris seems qualitatively better than 2D performance from the Nvidia blob on Linux. I am not sure why that is. It might be a GNOME 2.32 versus KDE 4.11 difference.

          Comment


          • #95
            I'm rooting for wayland. I want wayland to succeed to the point where i'd be willing to donate to help it's development if i could actually try it and see if i like it, but its just not in any even remotely usable state yet from what i hear...

            But Wayland's development is too slow and Mir is just some ubuntu junkpile that i wont ever want to touch, if X12 would be a X server written from scratch with modern hardware only in mind (forgetting everything about support for stuff from pre-2000) then i might just change my mind and support X12 instead.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by rabcor View Post
              I'm rooting for wayland. I want wayland to succeed to the point where i'd be willing to donate to help it's development if i could actually try it and see if i like it, but its just not in any even remotely usable state yet from what i hear...

              But Wayland's development is too slow and Mir is just some ubuntu junkpile that i wont ever want to touch, if X12 would be a X server written from scratch with modern hardware only in mind (forgetting everything about support for stuff from pre-2000) then i might just change my mind and support X12 instead.
              It's becoming pretty usable.

              Only a few details needs to be clarified, and some bugs to solve.
              If you want to test last Weston, you can try to install it on an external hard drive with Arch Linux, or try Fedora 20 (less complete Wayland implementation however).

              If you are a programmer, you can help by solving bugs.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Remote User View Post
                It not only doesn't solve any problems I have - it also destroys what works for me. X works perfectly for what I do with touchscreen GUIs at customer locations all around the world. I will never understand why some of you just can't deal with the fact that X makes a lot of things not only possible, but also easy, which would otherwise simply not be possible.
                But then you can just keep X11 if it works for you. What you can't, is arguing that wayland should be network transparent.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by erendorn View Post
                  But then you can just keep X11 if it works for you. What you can't, is arguing that wayland should be network transparent.
                  I have not argued that Wayland should be network transparent. I don't really understand why you have to take a shitty attitude toward anything I've written, put words in my mouth, and misrepresent what I have written here.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    I was reading the X12 list back in 2010. It is essentially a list of what has been done wrongly in X11. New protocol requires applications to be updated. So it's better to do with something like Wayland, which is a more radical redesign (and follows the philosophy of leaving much stuff to clients), suited to modern graphic hardware, while the network transparency requirement is removed as this is anyway semi-broken today (you anyway have to use something like NX - which does many tricks to shortcut X protocol issues - to really get useful remote desktop performance).

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by smorovic View Post
                      I was reading the X12 list back in 2010. It is essentially a list of what has been done wrongly in X11. New protocol requires applications to be updated. So it's better to do with something like Wayland, which is a more radical redesign (and follows the philosophy of leaving much stuff to clients), suited to modern graphic hardware, while the network transparency requirement is removed as this is anyway semi-broken today (you anyway have to use something like NX - which does many tricks to shortcut X protocol issues - to really get useful remote desktop performance).
                      I have been using X for remote displays quite satisfactorily for my touchscreen applications for over a decade and find nothing really wrong with it. NX does improve performance a bit but there's nothing broken in X that prevents or even hinders my use of it. Since Wayland removes the network transparent capabilities of X it is entirely unsuitable as a reworking of X.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X