Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

X.Org Server 1.15 Brings DRI3, Lacks XWayland Support

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the not-belated-for-eastern-orthodox dept.

X 340

An anonymous reader writes "A belated holiday gift for Linux users is the X.Org Server 1.15 'Egg Nog' release. X.Org Server 1.15 presents new features including DRI3 — a big update to their rendering model — a rewrite of the GLX windowing system code, support for Mesa Mega Drivers, and many bug fixes plus polishing. The release, though, goes without any mainline support for XWayland to ease the adoption of the Wayland Display Server while maintaining legacy X11 application support."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good! (4, Funny)

adolf (21054) | about 10 months ago | (#45810307)

Yet another good reason to disparage Wayland: Not even X supports it.

Re:Good! (2)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 10 months ago | (#45810313)

It could also be argued that you should jump to Wayland because X does not support it.

Re:Good! (2)

adolf (21054) | about 10 months ago | (#45810327)

No. *I* don't support Wayland.

That X also does not support Wayland is just win-win.

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810331)

A "win-win"?? Why does that kind of retarded vitriol not surprise me from an X fanboy?

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810357)

Relevant fortune: "Harrison's Postulate: For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism."

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810385)

X fanboys are generally retarded and love heaping piles of shit as long as they're open source. They're almost as bad as sysvinit fans.

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810391)

People like them are why USA still uses imperial system of measures.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810575)

And to think I didn't even know there was such a thing as an X fanboy until now, and I've been using X for like 20 years.

Re:America will not roll over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810903)

Also known as British Imperia, the system came into official use across the British Empire.

Re:Good! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810437)

They're almost as bad as sysvinit fans.

As a "sysvinit fan", since that what I grew up on and what I learned first,

fuck you.

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810551)

muh shell scripts

Re: Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810563)

XGayland

Re:Good! (2, Interesting)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 10 months ago | (#45810661)

Some of us grew up on Sun BSD you insensitive clod.
sysv init scripts are a new fangled mess.

Re:Good! (-1, Troll)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810383)

you're obviously not a fan of high performance desktop graphics then, keep your shitty x protocol, nobody really wants it anyway, it was a waste of 20 years....you guys are one of the primary reasons linux never made it to the desktop

Re:Good! (5, Interesting)

adolf (21054) | about 10 months ago | (#45810403)

No. I just like network-transparent applications. It was one of the main draws that I had toward Linux almost 20 years ago, and is why I still use it today.

(My home Linux boxen are all headless, and they can stay that way for all I care. If I want to run something graphical, it's trivial with X.)

(And no: VNC is more of a problem than it is a solution.)

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810415)

Then feel free to maintain X. Most of the X developers are now working on Wayland and they unanimously agree that you're a huge fucking retard.

Re:Good! (2)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810799)

yeah, I agree, I'm pretty sure somebody is working out how to make wayland network transparent, somebody must be, the writing is on the wall and somebody somewhere is thinking:

"dammit! in a year, my xclock will stop working, I have to make wayland network transparent!!"

Re:Good! (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 10 months ago | (#45811051)

No they are not. Some guy tried a year and a half ago and gave up because network transparency wasn't a high priority. It's also a blatant lie that "Most of the X developers are now working on Wayland". Funny how Kieth Packard wishing Wayland well has morphed into this.
It would be nice if both claims were the case, but sorry, we're all just going to have to wait a bit longer.

Re:Good! (4, Insightful)

jimshatt (1002452) | about 10 months ago | (#45810605)

Why is this modded Troll? I also use X's network transparency on a daily basis, and I think it's a good point.

Re: Good! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810677)

Wayland!

The same group of Prople behind

Gnome3
Pulseaudio
Systemd
Journald
Alienating Udev
Alienating 95% of their Userbase

If you all have so much problems with the ideology of Unix then why do you use a Unix based System. Why don't you move on and create your shabby world elsewhere ? Without causing more damage to ours ?

Re: Good! (-1, Troll)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810775)

we're repairing the damage your favourite idiots created by building the world you love with such a ridiculous, outdated mentality, no wonder the desktop never arrived on linux with people like you around...

Re: Good! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810803)

No, what you are doing is migrating one of Windows primary shortcomings into Linux.

Re: Good! (-1, Flamebait)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810877)

yeah, I mean, having a shit ton of games and high performance graphics applications sounds awfully lot like a shortcoming you fucking retard....

I wonder how many of those android phones which run using a VM use x.....and deliver high performance multimedia content....ALL BECAUSE THEY GOT RID OF X

Wow, the idiot is strong in this one. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45811025)

When something running under Wine runs faster with that translation than it does under windows, you cannot claim that the windowing system in X is slower and degrading performance of Linux compared to Windows.

It's taken as a matter of faith that this network transparency MUST be making it slow.

Merely because it is "obvious" that if something is flexible, it MUST be slower!

Re:Good! (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810777)

you number in the hundreds, maybe thousands if you want to be kind, there are millions of people using X, you are a drop in the ocean.

if you want to continue to use X, feel free, but don't drag us down with you....

Re:Good! (1, Insightful)

jones_supa (887896) | about 10 months ago | (#45810407)

This so much. Put a typical Linux desktop (say, Linux Mint MATE or Cinnamon) on a netbook and see how the desktop is sluggish and even basic window animations are choppy.

Re:Good! (2)

reikae (80981) | about 10 months ago | (#45810515)

As much as I'd like to see GNU/Linux succeed on the desktop, my experience has been similar. How much of it is X's fault though, that I don't know. My guess is not much actually, but I'm curious if anyone knows better.

Re:Good! (4, Insightful)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810761)

my knowledge might go a little deeper than yours because I had an interest in computer graphics many years ago. Although I've not got a perfect understanding, I'm probably more right than wrong (or somebody here will tell me otherwise and we can both learn a thing or two).

but ultimately, the way that people write high performance graphics stacks now favours compositing and graphics cards require to do a lot of direct accesses in order to make that happen as fast as possible, you have a region of memory and it's mapped to a location somewhere in the gpu memory and you just blast it with data, you can't have too many processes in the middle here, so thats why we need a DRM (direct rendering manager) to basically give x a direct path to the graphics hardware without having to go through the cpu or the kernel etc, as little as possible anyway.

Anytime you have to context switch, you lose time, which hits performance hard, so everything is like cleared out the way and the software and hardware almost talk directly to each other, which doesn't really happen with any other software, writing files, accessing network, computing data, almost always goes through the cpu and the kernel and for graphics applications which render megabytes of data per second, this is just awful and dramatically kills the performance. The retina display on an ipad is 2560 x 1600, so at 24/32 bit colour, each complete frame is 11-15MB, imagine 60 of those? Easily 600 - 900 MB per second. All of that data is being transferred from the system to the gpu every second the display is on, so it's a huge amount of data. Of course, you can reduce this by using gpu memory buffers and "damages" to know which surfaces need to be re-rendered (i.e. rendered and transferred again cause the display information inside them changed)

However, this kind of "direct, get out of my way, let me speak to the manager" way of thinking doesn't really fit with the linux way of doing things, everything is integrated, the x protocol isn't really to blame, but the only reason for people wanting to keep x alive is because of the protocol, it is basically a way to draw pixels, lines, primatives, AND their favourite, abstract everything across a network so software can be anywhere and X will solve how to display it. EXCEPT IT DOESNT SOLVE IT!! Even when you want to network x, you have to manually setup a bunch of configuration on both machines to get it to work, it doesn't work by magic, or autoconfiguration, cause nobody cares enough to do it, evidently, cause even now you have to manually do this, 20 years later.....what a bullshit system....

Of course, then you get to the lower levels and a whole bunch of compromises come into effect, nobody agreed on even the most basic things, fonts, oh lets make a font server, which will never work properly because of all the compromises made for that and it'll only work in certain circumstances....

It really is the most bullshit, fucking stupid system ever created and people seem to be so stubbornly ignorant and stupid they refuse to kill it, cause I dunno, it's really hard to understand, you see some of the hatred for wayland from these people are you are just so flabbergasted by it, you can't even start to reason, why would you keep x alive? it's almost like it's their child, they wouldn't care if it had three arms, ate other babies and urinated acid and used it as a weapon, they STILL wouldn't kill it....or even contain it...cause it's their baby....Thats the kind of logic you're going up against if you talk to these idiots...

But it's such an ugly, nasty, knarly mess of bullshit and compromises that NO DESKTOP UI TOOLKIT USES IT, Qt, Gtk and Wx for example, pretty much just request a drawing rectangle and then do everything themselves, completely sidestepping x, but if you looked at the x protocol and especially a "unix haters" entry on the subject and know something about computers and/or programming, you'd understand why people want to kill it so badly.

Take a look at this and then try evaluate that against the people who want to keep it alive...Of course, some of the explanations here maybe fixed, or resolved in some small way, the text is very old, but I hope it gives you a great insight into why people hate X so much....Take it with a pinch of salt and humour, I hope it works for you like it did for me.

http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/x-windows/disaster.html [art.net]

WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU WANT THIS PIECE OF SHIT TO SURVIVE?? KILL IT WITH FIRE AND REPLACE THE WHOLE SHITBAG

Thanks for letting me rant, I hope in some way it was educational, even though the language perhaps was not :D

Re: Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810807)

Thank you for your througly comment. While I technicly agree I still have a question left.

Why do you use a Unixoid Operating System with over 40 years of ideology behind it, if you heavily disagree with existing implementations ?

You are obviously on the wrong system. Please go ahead, take your followers with you and alienate someones else's ideology world.

Why not searching for something that already solved the issues described by you ?

There is:

Haiku-OS
Aros

Many more OS's that probably offers better solutions for yor base than messing up the Linux Toolchain.

Re: Good! (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810895)

I'm not messing up the linux toolchain, I'm helping to improve it by fixing the bullshit created by barely competent programmers, if my contribution is to push the car and let somebody else to the driving, I'm more than happy to do it.

Re: Good! (1)

celle (906675) | about 10 months ago | (#45810949)

"messing up the Linux Toolchain."

      It isn't just the linux toolchain. All the other *nix have to deal with these self/linux centric fuck-ups too! So much for portable.

Re: Good! (1)

celle (906675) | about 10 months ago | (#45811007)

"Haiku-OS
Aros"

        Minix, Plan9, MSWindows/wayland's mommy, riscOS, etc, etc.

      Don't forget, the younger it is, the more buggy it'll be.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810933)

>you have to manually setup a bunch of configuration on both machines to get it to work, it doesn't work by magic, or autoconfiguration
No you don't

ssh -y user@host has worked out of teh box on pretty much every box I've dealt with that last few years.

You're just threadshitting at this point. Go back to windows

Re:Good! (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810947)

Really? cause the last time I tried that, it didn't.....so maybe it's working now but not all the time or it depends on something you've installed or configured that I haven't ?

Remote X was a bullshit and almost nobody uses it, VNC, RDP, NX all replaced it as being better substitutes because it sidestepped it all....

Re:Good! (1)

Lennie (16154) | about 10 months ago | (#45810935)

Funny thing is, everyone always complained about latency and if you look at this graph you'll see Windows actually generally has higher latency than Linux these days: http://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1307193-SO-WINDOWSIV40&sha=869d65c&p=2 [openbenchmarking.org]

From this article: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_ivbmesa92_win7&num=2 [phoronix.com]

Re:Good! (2)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810973)

as interesting as it is, it's not really the point.

the point is, in the 21st century, we don't need to deal with this anymore, we can do better, so lets do that, it might not have 100% of the features the old system has, but it might be possible over time to implement those features in a more sane way, with better knowledge and tools that what they had in the 80's when they built this system.

that x is so old, badly designed and hacky that it actually curtails people from using it, preferring to hide away in the toolkits and never touch x directly, just means that x is in fact irrelevant and for most people, they won't even know x is gone, cause the toolkits will just make them unaware of that.

so, lets support them cleaning the house, we'll be left with a better architecture, better performance (even more than in your graphs) cause surely deleting a bunch of this crap and making a cleaner, better structure will result in memory and performance improvements.

thats the point, not that compared to windows, we're doing ok, it's about being compared to ourself, it's a shit job, lets try again

Re:Good! (4, Informative)

adolf (21054) | about 10 months ago | (#45811035)

Really? Lots of configuration?

Last time I ran an X11 application remotely, I used SSH with X forwarding with a simple command line. Worked great. (Flawless, I might say.)

Last time I ran a multi-headed X box (where multi-head == "two or more independent monitors+keyboards+mice, each with their own root window and window manager"), the configuration wasn't trivial, but it wasn't hard either. And once it was done, any X11 "server" could connect to this "client" and run any program over 100-mbps Ethernet. (Look, ma! A terminal server! Hot-desking! Remote access! THE CLOUD! Buzzword-bingo on the end of a 20-year-old carrot!)

And it doesn't much matter when the "last time" was, since the methods haven't changed a bit over the past decade or two.

These are things that other graphical systems cannot do. And they are the reasons why X, or perhaps X11, is still important.

Those who do not understand X, are doomed to recreate it. Badly.

Re:Good! (1)

dosius (230542) | about 10 months ago | (#45810717)

Speak for yourself, Gunga Din - I run MATE on a netbook and it's just fine.

Reply to Comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810733)

Animations make any system appear sluggish (in my eyes).

Re:Reply to Comment (2)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810789)

then you're using slow equipment, or you're eyes are broken in some way

Re:Reply to Comment (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810811)

oops, you're/your, maybe mine are broken too :)

Re:Good! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810909)

X runs fine on my RaspberryPi

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810439)

Oh, shut your self-centred, narrow-minded and brain-dead pie-hole.

You're talking about the place where an incumbent with a 95% market share and decades worth of user indoctrination - literally billions of them and furthermore have Mega Billion dollars worth of applications and their associated data locked in. And you blame the "failure" of Linux to just smash that on X, and by extension the people who like and use it? GTFO.

You must be a certified idiot, I can only assume you got some to type in that post for you. Frankly speaking, I'm amazed you even manage to breath on your own.

Re:Good! (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 10 months ago | (#45810467)

Ahh, that was a classic Anonymous Angry Coward post. I have to light up the fireplace, sit down on a large leather recliner and have a glass of VSOP while reading your stylistic comment again. The words "I'm amazed you even manage to breath on your own" really give it a touching ending. Masterpiece.

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810497)

It has the faggotty ruinous stench of Shuttleworth's rep all over it. Wayland is the first name of Smithers for a reason. And many of you don't know this, but Smithers was black. It's true, in the early episodes of the Simpsons, Smithers was black -- Google it -- just like the Prison Niggers.

The Prison Niggers are the biggest, baddest, toughest prison gang in California and parts of New York. They thrive on the opening of the tight anuses of pasty, skinny, wimpy white men like you.

Fuck Wayland. All hail The Prison Niggers!

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810855)

Hi, Angry Guy here.

I just wanted to say that I'm posting as an AC simply because I've never bothered with getting an account. I don't need another username/password to keep track of.

As for the rest, I wish more people just simply took a stand against all the blatant stupidity that gets poured on us every day. It's because nobody does, but rather ignore it or try to reason with it that we have crap like creationism and climate change deniers. They simply overwhelm people with their asinine crap at a rate which can't be dealt with by rational people. They should all just be told to STFU until they at least become rational. As in this case, blaming X, of all things when there are so many other reasons. Not a single millisecond of thought gone into that.

Amusing and depressing at the same time that someone making a rational argument, and demanding some rational thought from a lunatic is the one who gets the down vote. I guess that's what you get when stupidity has the same value as coherent and considered thought, and thus "needs" to be treated with "respect", rather than being called out for the retarded crap it is.

Re:Good! (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810907)

I think it's very telling that linux seems to be destroying the market competition, now that it's being used through android and the linux system supports it

so yes....I would have to say that the x system is primarily responsible for the demise of the linux desktop, or at least, the demise of your idiotic mentality

now that android sidestepped all your bullshit, it's practically eating the competition....microsoft has fallen, nokia has fallen, numerically speaking apple has too, but has so much money they can ride it out maybe.

All of that happened when somebody said "hey guys, you know what, linux is great, but fuck all this bullshit and do it better"

Re:Good! (-1, Offtopic)

adolf (21054) | about 10 months ago | (#45810573)

I hate to reply to myself, but:

To the mods who are marking my opinions as Troll: I've had a karma bonus ever since there was a karma bonus, and you don't phase me. Meanwhile, for the sake of whatever is left of the sanctity of /., remember: There is no "-1, Disagree" moderation.

Srsly, kids. Grow a pair and reply if you disagree. (And get off my lawn.)

Re:Good! (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810901)

fact is, we all think you're a dick cause you're holding up progress so you can keep necrophilically masturbating over the x protocol that everybody knows is dead already

if you want to help the desktop, push forward, don't us all drag back so you couple of hundred/thousand maybe people can stop the desktop from evolving and remain in your comfort zone, help to make wayland network transparent if you can, if it cannot do it, try to suggest ways it can be done.

but don't under any circumstances think we're going backwards, fuck you guys, keep your x, we'll happily live without it, even if you can't.

OK, let's jump! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810459)

You jump first. OK, buddy?

Re:Good! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810333)

There is nothing "even" about X. It's old, it's rusty, and it's almost dead. It doesn't matter whether it supports Wayland or not anymore.

Re:Good! (1)

peppepz (1311345) | about 10 months ago | (#45810359)

It's younger than UNIX, C, Windows and other venerable stuff which keeps the world going nevertheless. Who cares if it's old? It's not like it hasn't been constantly updated, as per TFA, and by very skilled people, so it has this useful feature: it works here and now. I don't feel the "brokenness" asking to be fixed.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810443)

>updated

More like workarounded. âoeWhy would you ever fix anything if you can workaround it?â ©

Re:Good! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810479)

so it has this useful feature: it works here and now.

But it doesn't work, that's the problem. X.org makes the slowest, highest-latency graphics stack that is on any OS today. It's crusty crap.

"slowest" - not (2)

tota (139982) | about 10 months ago | (#45810773)

It's good enough for valve to base its console on (and not wayland), it's also good enough for me (FWIW) in that it works and at this point wayland does not as it is nowhere near feature parity with X11.
And when comparing X11 vs wayland for a simple desktop: wayland loses every single benchmark [phoronix.com] .

Re: "slowest" - not (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810839)

Yeah because Steam and games uses X and not OpenGL...

Re: "slowest" - not (1)

F.Ultra (1673484) | about 10 months ago | (#45810905)

That benchmark don't show what you think it does. It's between X and XWeyland, that such a setup have overheads is no mystery.

Re:"slowest" - not (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 10 months ago | (#45811031)

And when comparing X11 vs wayland for a simple desktop: wayland loses every single benchmark.

but don't you understand? It's legacy, man, LEGACY!!! And back in 1987 it made my sun 3/60 go slow and I do not forget and I do not forgive. Besides, I can't spare the 20 MHz now any more than I could then.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810781)

"X.org makes the slowest, highest-latency graphics stack that is on any OS today"

      To quote your own book:
Who cares when the gpu hardware is getting faster in leaps and bounds every release. X is stable, well supported, and currently a major part of the graphics infrastructure of *nix. Nothing beats good enough.

celle

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810609)

So never develop anything new, because that's how it's always been done. Good thinkin' there chief. I'll just go have a donut while the com... comp-juta... comparat... calculamator loads the starting screen.

Re:Good! (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810885)

errr, to be honest, looking at the x protocol and other related linux desktop stuff coming from them, I wouldn't agree that they are very skilled at all, I'd say that they are hacks and deserve to be called so.

a skilled programmer would have realised the bullshit it was a decade ago and dropped it like a hot coal in favour or something else, no skilled programmer I know, or would want to call skilled, would continue to pound it with a hammer like those hacks have done for so long....

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810997)

errr, to be honest, looking at the x protocol and other related linux desktop stuff coming from them, I wouldn't agree that they are very skilled at all, I'd say that they are hacks and deserve to be called so.

So that was Jim Gettys (and others); you know, the guy who defined HTTP 2 for W3C and is fixing the TCP buffer bloat. (I agree, he is sort of a hack.) And Keith Packard wrote the X Server and AFAIC he wrote some seriously crappy C code for that. Maybe he's gotten better with time, but circa 1991 the server source was a disaster; no use of ANSI function decls, lots of mismatched types. Making the sample server work on 64-bit little-endian, e.g. Alpha, was not especially hard, but there were many latent bugs for a long time on big-endian 64-bit hardware because of the sloppiness of the code. Keith is/was brilliant in other ways, but writing clean C code was not his forte.

stop developing x and support wayland instead (1, Insightful)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810395)

even if you don't agree 100% with the design, you can perhaps help to make it more modular so you can do your own thing inside a common framework, but please, stop supporting that old rust bucket.

if all the people who worked on this ploughed their time into wayland, or other alternatives, we'd be done already...

x is dead, it's not even a challenger in the next game, the only reason it's alive is because nobody has a viable alternative they can use today.....

Re:stop developing x and support wayland instead (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810433)

X11 is not dead. As you point out, the "next-game challengers" have yet to prove themselves viable. If you want to be relevant today you support the technology that actually exists.

Re:stop developing x and support wayland instead (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810593)

X11? Who said anything about X11? I use X9... I'm very happy that it supports color, and anything more is just excess.

Re:stop developing x and support wayland instead (-1, Flamebait)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810869)

login to your real account and put your name on that statement coward...

x11 is dead, period, only fools and idiots suggest otherwise, it's a hack upon hack, dirty, high latency piece of bullshit that no skilled programmer would have continued to work on.

it should have been buried years ago and instead, here we all are, watching it decay in front of us whilst android based systems start to appear and do something linux never did and do it in almost no time at all.....all because they said "fuck this shit" and did something better

or, do the opposite (5, Insightful)

dltaylor (7510) | about 10 months ago | (#45810561)

If all of the competent people working on Wayland would stop wasting time on it and improve the X server, think how much better it might be.

Wayland lacks absolutely necessary features (true "over the net" and root window access, for example) for a significant number of applications and users. Until it has those, even if only through X emulation, it is simply not ready for use by me, and a lot of people like me.

Re:or, do the opposite (-1, Flamebait)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810695)

Here is a true story, you might not like it, but it's true nonetheless.

You and your friends are a tiny fraction of the overall number of X users. You are insignificant in the face of our needs.

Right now, you number probably in the hundreds or even thousands, compared to the millions of users who use X because they have no other choice.

Please, by all means, continue to use X, but realise and understand that there are orders of magnitude more people who are NOT in your category and you are a drop in the ocean and we need to solve the ridiculous problems X has FIRST and then afterwards, we can always think about how to solve your problems afterwards.

OR, perhaps you can suggest ways to extend wayland to make it work with your usage scenario. But I realise that not everybody can do this because it's hugely complex, but it might be enough that you suggest ways to emulate the behaviour your need, or promote people to solve the problem on your behalf.

Personally, I hate the "if you don't like it, code it" answer, which seems to be the main "open source get out clause #1", but I really can't suggest we "do the opposite", thats the most ridiculous comment I've ever heard on the topic....

It's selfish of you to inflict your view of the world on the vast majority of people who really don't care about the features you so desperately require, that barely anybody else needs that you're perfectly content to screw over all those people to stay in your comfort bubble.

And please, don't reply with "show me the stats of how many people, blah blah blah" cause we all know it's true, so lets not play that game, ok?

Re:or, do the opposite (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 10 months ago | (#45810753)

It's selfish of you to inflict your view of the world

WTF?

He's done nothing more than you have - post to slashdot. Get off your high horse.

Re:or, do the opposite (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810821)

maybe he did, but he is selfishly trying to convince people to take a step backwards just so he can continue to use xclock or whatever the fuck application he uses that STILL needs the x protocol....

Re:or, do the opposite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810953)

You need to see a psychiatrist about that narcissism of yours.

Re:or, do the opposite (5, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 10 months ago | (#45811053)

You are insignificant in the face of our needs.

Back in the olden days of the Windows versus Linux flamewars--when it still mattered and OSX didn't exist, this was exactly the sort of arguments the Windows people used to make about Linux features.

Then the attitude was hackish and anything you could do seemed reasonable/fun/cool because, why insult what another user wants to do? It's their system after all. That sort of attitude was why a lot of us came to Linux and OSS in the first place.

It's sad to see that "begone you insignificant peon" is now infiltating the OSS culture. Please leave. Regardless of the merits of this particular fight, your attitude is total poison. Take it somewhere it can't do any damage.

Re:or, do the opposite (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810837)

The difference is in the feasability of your 2 solutions :

  The OP suggests that seasoned (maybe a little bit too seasoned) C coders move from an awful (full of unmaintainable legacy code) codebase to and fresh and modern codebase (although I'll concede the architecture is a bit more complex but BETTER AND MORE CONSISTANT)

  You suggest that a group of people who LEFT the X.org project because they are convinced it is doomed and the Codebase is not worth the effort anymore, or because upon entering the threw up the first line of code they saw, move back into the X.org project... Why would they do that ?

  Does wayland have 100% of the features of X11 ? of course no. Will it ? it depends mostly on the people who will join the project.

  This is a battle between those who do not want to leave their confortable (known) but FUGLY house and those who had the courage to start over to make something more maintainable for the future. You sided with the grumpy old men who won't move out of their burning house. Good for you.

Re:or, do the opposite (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810891)

pass me the petrol....it's burning too slowly....

Re:or, do the opposite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810945)

Why this incessant and rabid anti-X11 hate?
What happened to you man?
Frightened by a copy of the xlib programming manual when you were a young and impressionable youth or what?

Re:or, do the opposite (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810941)

Sorry, but I've been using Linux for a very long time, and most users I've heard arguing the network transparency benefits don't actually require it for what they do.

Xorg is archaic, and the only people who think its totally awesome are people who aren't actually involved with the project (many developers have stood up and pointed out what a disaster maintaining it is).

Even small things we can't do yet, such as: Windows allows users to recover their sessions when their graphics driver crashes and we can barely kill applications when they are frozen still (but on OSX/Windows, you almost always can). I'd say give Wayland a chance, and see what it CAN do. We know X11 is lacking, and, unless someone gives Wayland a chance, we'll never know how much better (or worse) Linux could be.

If you list a few of those "significant Apps" though, that would be fantastic.

Its not obvious to me that XWayland and X should (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810411)

Its not obvious to me that XWayland and X should be merged. XWayland is a compatibility layer for Wayland, and the only things in needs to support is the published interface. Changes to the rendering model may well be irrelevant, as XWayland would render through the Wayland display layer anyway.

Re:Its not obvious to me that XWayland and X shoul (1)

raxx7 (205260) | about 10 months ago | (#45810723)

XWayland is a modified version of the X.org server, which instead of rendering though the kernel/hardware, renders as a Wayland client.
It makes no sense to try and maintain XWayland as a separate fork of the X.org server.

Re:Its not obvious to me that XWayland and X shoul (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810881)

Why reimplement X? XWayland needs the entire goat fuck that is X, except rendering to a buffer for Wayland to process instead of actual hardware. The end result should be very similar to running X in a VM, you draw to a virtual screen that the host can display on actual hardware, if it wants. Seems to me the by far easiest way to do this is through patching xorg.

Wayland won't catch on soon (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810511)

Before the using via network (remote X) is available for wayland, and includes root windowless mode, most of non-hobbyist users (in heterogenic corporate environments and such) will never switch over. There's nothing to get excited of if you aren't at even half-way feature parity.

Re:Wayland won't catch on soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810533)

But, but, it's the year of faggotry on the desktop!!!!!!!!!!111111111eleven

Ooobongos!!!!!! LYENUCKS!

LOL MICRO$OFT

my system was equipped with the following:

1 video card whose drivers need to be fucking recompiled every motherfucking week
1 sound card that won't be properly supported for another four years

Re:Wayland won't catch on soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810597)

Will you please stop mispronouncing Linux? It's "lee-nooks". Thank you!

Re: Wayland won't catch on soon (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810697)

Actually it's liGNUx

Re:Wayland won't catch on soon (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810857)

that tiny fraction of users won't matter, since almost all the distributions will change, they are free to continue to use their old system and all new software will eventually stop to support it, like xfree86....

so the juggernaut will continue

FRiST sTOP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810615)

Re:FRiST sTOP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810713)

Fuck you, bitch.

CAN WE STOP LINKING TO PHORONIX? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810649)

It is asking too much for a link to *official* sources? (Hint: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-announce/2013-December/002384.html)

How well does XWayland work? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810655)

Having seen terrible X compatibility layers for Mac OS X and Windows, I have got to ask if I should expect XWayland to be better? Integration between applications talking the X protocol and applications talking a proprietary protocol has been ranging from terrible to nonexistent. Some implementations have taken the approach of creating a window inside which all X applications are rendered. This has potential for great compatibility among the X applications, but they are demoted to second class citizens, with no chance of integrating with anything happening outside that window. Others have been rendering X applications each in a separate window. But usually they still cannot see windows opened by applications talking the proprietary protocol, and thus cannot interact with them. Secondly that design has a tendency to treat windows opened by an X application I just started as if it was just one more window opened by another X application, which was already running. For example on Windows, that causes new windows to be opened behind existing windows instead of in front.

The lack of X has been the main technical drawback Mac OS X has been having compared to Linux. I'd much rather see Mac OS X catch up with Linux than for Linux to go down to the level of Mac OS X.

Re:How well does XWayland work? (1)

raxx7 (205260) | about 10 months ago | (#45810729)

I can't even remember what trying to use X under Windows was like. $DEITY bless memory loss.

For Mac OS X, you have XQuartz. It consists of a modified X.org server and a custom window manager and from what my Mac OS X wielding colleagues say, it works pretty well. I don't think it suffers of any of the issues you mention.

XWayland is expected to work seamlessly as well.

Re:How well does XWayland work? (4, Insightful)

Mr Thinly Sliced (73041) | about 10 months ago | (#45810751)

> Having seen terrible X compatibility layers for Mac OS X and Windows

The OSX X (XQuartz) implementation _is_ xorg-server (currently 1.14.4) - you know, the one used on Linux (with certain OSX specific tweaks to allow non-root mode)

The problems you mention with interoperability are largely down to the core windowing systems being vastly different models. We can argue about which model is correct but the interoperability problems are a side effect of different models - not evidence of a particular model being bad.

I'm not convinced from your descriptions here you quite understand the complexity of the interactions.

> The lack of X has been the main technical drawback Mac OS X has been
> having compared to Linux.
> I'd much rather see Mac OS X catch up with Linux than for Linux to go down
> to the level of Mac OS X.

OSX has vsync based updates, sensible event handling and lots of core library stuff (like the AVFramework) that makes it a pleasure to program compared to XWindows.

The Linux desktop _needs_ to get off X. It's an outdated behemoth with a model that is way out of date. Now you could say "well let's update the model then".

Sure, you can do that. And when you do that, you get Wayland.

Re:How well does XWayland work? (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810847)

bingo.....exactly!!

Re:How well does XWayland work? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810859)

"The Linux desktop _needs_ to get off X. It's an outdated behemoth with a model that is way out of date. Now you could say "well let's update the model then".

Sure, you can do that. And when you do that, you get Wayland."

      No! Wayland is what you get when you throw X away after barely updating and not improving it for twenty years and copy everyone else's implementations instead.

celle

Re:How well does XWayland work? (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810929)

PROTIP: if nobody is updating your solution, but copying everybody elses, it's because they've realised your solution was bullshit and everybody is moving to the more standard, generally accepted one.

Re:How well does XWayland work? (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about 10 months ago | (#45810843)

I'm fairly sure nobody using a mac has ever thought to themselves, not even once

"you know, the main technical drawback to mac osx, is the lack of x...."

I'm fairly sure, everybody using a mac, has always thought, wow, this is cool, I get to do my work and it's so easy and simple to use

kreme of the kode contest (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810667)

whereas the hobbyists of the heartfelt part produce script that allows the web page to render a wwworking (unvisible) (could look like a pyramid eye?) 'virtual' camera & microphone combo embedment. replenishments will be announced on scott olsen day. let the corepirate nazi poo-pooing be our guide on this too.

Now is the time for more than the status quo (2)

Your Average Joe (303066) | about 10 months ago | (#45810827)

When Citrix came out with ICA that should have been an indication where remote display tech should be headed, then we have Microsoft doing RDP and now the king pin is VMware with PCoIP. What we need is a way to remote a whole computer and not just the graphics. Why?

ALL USERS want the following:
1) Remote sound
2) Remote USB
3) Video Acceleration between a client and server

Why so that simple web pages with Flash content do not suck. And so that all this crappy USB stuff that end users have purchased can work on a remote session.

Re:Now is the time for more than the status quo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810987)

...Why so that simple web pages with Flash content do not suck..

One could argue that a web page with any flash content can hardly be regarded as simple..
(Now, as a label describing the authors of such web pages...)

Why not both? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45810835)

You could achieve network-transparent Wayland by implementing a Qt server. The Qt library could be a thin protocol translator just like Xlib that sends Qt messages to a Wayland Qt server.

In a country far away and long ago.... (5, Insightful)

hlub (153437) | about 10 months ago | (#45810893)

In a country long ago and far away there lived the good King X the eleventh.

He had a lot of ministers, the most important of which had become the minister of Composition. His job was to have peoples houses painted. If you wanted your house painted, you would have to ask the King. Every day the king would spend long hours with the minister of Composition, who would know all the houses in the country, had an exact knowledge of the Royal Paint Budget, and could call in the painters.

Although almost everyone lived in the capital called Localhost the King would sometimes travel around the country and kindly hear peoples paint requests. Every night the King would return to his palace, talk to the minister of Composition, and then decide whether you could have your house painted, and when.

Then on a dark winter's night, a group of grumpy people thought how much more efficient it would be if everyone would talk to the minister of Composition directly. Thus the Wayland Conspiracy was born. The next day, at daybreak, they deposed the good King and made the minister of Composition the head of state: president Compositor. To cater for the few people in remote villages they re-appointed the King as secratary to the president: the Secretary for Remote Villages. He would still travel around the country (albeit in a suit, and without his crown). He would still talk to president Compositor every night, like in the old days.

The press in other counties, like Windonia and Applestan, were very positive: finally this backward country had a modern government. Now its poor inhabitants could have the same beautiful colored houses they had. Welcome to the modern world!

The people in the country itself didn't notice a lot of difference, however. In the old days things took a little longer, but not everyone needs his house painted every day. Many still called the Secretary for Remote Villages "King", especially in the countryside.

But the people in Windonia and Applestan were very satisfied: they always had felt that their geovernment was superior, and the Wayland revolution had proved their point.

The King just smiled.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?