2 ms·
Well, I'd be all for a rewrite. But doing so, we're throwing all existing Xwindows code down a drain. I'm not liking that, at all. I also want network transpar
by kefka 10y ago
Well, I'd be all for a rewrite. But doing so, we're throwing all existing Xwindows code down a drain. I'm not liking that, at all.
I also want network transparency. Right now, I can run a Windows program remotely, via X and WINE. I can't do that on Windows proper without a whole lot of setup on a Windows Server (I've done it). Yeah, X may be slow. It may have crappy security model. But in the end, it's better than what MS has and better than what Mac has.
I could imagine something different. Go back to core principles, and write a server using current design paradigm and knowledge of hardware. Get the server side running, and well. Write an emulation layer that will allow existing X apps to use it. And then start porting from X to.. say, Ywindows. :)
(Then again, I wished that DRM existed for Linux, so the graphical subsystem could have its own top, memory manager, process scheduler, and such. Then that would have set up Linux to be the dominant force in computation. Alas, it never happened that way.)
- tracker1 10y agoI'm pretty sure I remember some compatibility shim being part of the wayland & mir plans in order to support X11 apps.