-
Wayland requires kernel side APIs, so no - it's less portable. And writing that code to interface with GPU hardware isn't easy, either, even if you can copy a lot of it from the linux kernel.Originally posted by danieru View Post
However, the client side bits are far simpler and so you could certainly say that side of it is more portable than the big complicated project X is. X is just everywhere because it's the only thing available to those OS's besides writing something from scratch.Leave a comment:
-
I take umbrage at that logo!
The modern version of X11 is from 1987, not 1980!
More seriously, I don't really care if they lose their x.org website, but the project does need to live on for two reasons. First, they need to maintain the x.org software, which is going to hang around for a while. Second, they need to make sure that Wayland actually happens even though the going has been slower than most people would like.
Leave a comment:
-
I think in most of these comments the people are kidding about Xorg-the-server dying.
I was using KDE with vsync-full-screen-repaint turned on and everything run fine(!).
Edit: This setting is actually not worth doing. when running glxgears with this setting on it makes the whole desktop lag.Last edited by zuxun; 18 January 2016, 11:45 PM.Leave a comment:
-
Is wayland more portable than x.org? I mean by dependencies.
x.org run on minix 3, BSD, and other open source OS. But wayland only on linux, that might be normal though, being experimental technology.Leave a comment:
-
Are You Sure You Want X.Org To Die?
Phoronix: Are You Sure You Want X.Org To Die?
Whenever posting news items about the X.Org Foundation, it's common to routinely see a few comments about "let X.org die already!", "Wayland is the future!", and other similar remarks...
Leave a comment: