Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: With Ubuntu 10.10 It May Be Easier To Run Wayland

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    why not? If it is smaller, cleaner and faster why the hell not? If otherwise I can see the problem...
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    I think the idea of wayland is to simplify a lot!! using kms,opengl and dri2 functions!!

    xorg is old, it has a large number of lines of outdated code, so it will be awesome to get an updated windows server making use of modern kms, dri2, opengl... functions. Nothing is going to work much better in wayland (if it gets implemented), it will be simply a major clean up. But yes, wayland is in a very premature stage.
    That is the whole deal: it is not. According to the people who work on x related stuff it doesn't make things easier cleaner or faster. In fact, it ads another layer that has to be maintained because we cannot let X go. X will always have to run.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Android doesn't have X and it's works fine..

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaestroMaus View Post
    In fact, it ads another layer that has to be maintained because we cannot let X go. X will always have to run.
    Not if the applications support Wayland directly. That would mean wxWidgets, Gtk and Qt would need to be ported to Wayland. Then X would only need to be enabled for legacy apps.

    Mac OS X does this just fine. It has X, but I don't see it running there all the time.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    173

    Default

    I'd rather see toolkits switch to XCB from Xlib, first instead of going directly to wayland. Wayland was not designed to replace the X11 protocol, but the part of X.org that manages the display drivers. But now even X.org is switching to the same technologies Wayland uses...

    As far as XCB goes I think XCB should fix the slow window resizing (Xlib is not X11)...

    If you lose drop X11 you lose all this:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hibaFjxAQAg
    http://dailypackage.fedorabook.com/u...-09-Xephyr.png
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MUOn_nJmRA
    Not to mention that X11 can be easily extended to compete with Citrix (like NX already does)...

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    173

    Default

    I'd rather see toolkits switch to XCB from Xlib, first instead of going directly to wayland. Wayland was not designed to replace the X11 protocol, but the part of X.org that manages the display drivers. But now even X.org is switching to the same technologies Wayland uses...

    As far as XCB goes I think XCB should fix the slow window resizing (Xlib is not X11)...

    If you lose drop X11 you lose all this:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hibaFjxAQAg
    http://dailypackage.fedorabook.com/u...-09-Xephyr.png
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MUOn_nJmRA
    Not to mention that X11 can be easily extended to compete with Citrix (like NX already does)...

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Here is what I was talking about earlier in the thread.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    It is not a full X11 implementation, only a server.
    Wayland is not even a partial X11 implementation. An X server can run on top of it, though.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    Wayland is not even a partial X11 implementation. An X server can run on top of it, though.
    Can it be extended so that it could become:
    -Compatible with Xlib? *thinking about parsing*
    -Compatible with X.org client?

    Let's asume Qt will run on it. Then the only reason that somebody who uses his/her desktop in a non-network fashion will have to run X.org on top of it is for legacy cruft... That will make the legacy cruft slower because of the added layer. However... however... native Wayland software will be faster! Newer, more demanding software gets faster and older less demanding software will become a little bit heavier.

    What is holding people back to make the widget toolkit like Qt run over a network? Plasma already does... It probably means less data... Also apps like VLC use networking. So maybe this whole compressed pixmap render remotely thing might become outdated?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Geez you guys are reading way too much into this.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default 3 Videos

    The 3 videos mentioned earlier showed:

    - Xinerama over 9 screens on different laptops
    - Remote access
    - Multiple active keyboards & mice on 1 screen

    These were stated "what we lose", but:

    (for all of them, X can run and provide those services)

    - Remote access
    Can easily be implemented in the Wayland compositor

    - Multi-pointer
    Is a rarely-used feature that hasn't made it to distos yet and remains as a rare feature. It could be implemented with sufficient interest

    - Xinerama over 9 screens
    I'm not knowledgeable on this one, but Wayland already enumerates displays of available video cards.

Posting Permissions

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