4 ms·
>Ultimately, since I can't go wrong with X and I can go wrong with Wayland, the choice was easy. Keep in mind that Wayland has been designed by people who've b
by emersion 8y ago
>Ultimately, since I can't go wrong with X and I can go wrong with Wayland, the choice was easy.
Keep in mind that Wayland has been designed by people who've been maintaining X11 for years.
>it also offers no mode that would work over a network
X11 has a huge number of issues when it comes to network transparency. tl;dr is: it's not designed for this, you should use a proper remote desktop protocol instead. More info:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ
>Of that, EGL even requires Mesa and thus Cgo.
That's not true anymore. You can use the DMA-BUF protocol instead of wl_drm. I'm not sure how to export a DMA-BUF without Cgo though… But that's a different issue. If you're going to use the GPU you'll probably need Cgo anyway.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y ago> X11 has a huge number of issues when it comes to network transparency. tl;dr is: it's not designed for this X is very much designed for network transparency. The modern extensions that sling around pixmaps for every little graphical operation are what isn't. I can still remotely run X11R5 clients thanks to X and its network support.
- the_why_of_y 8y agoYou can, if by "network" you mean low latency LAN. Modern network remoting protocols work over high latency WANs as well, which X11 fundamentally can't do because too much of the protocol requires synchronous round-trips.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoYou can run X over a WAN with the eyecandy turned off. It could be run over a slow modem. The problem lies in everything that was tacked on assuming it would only be used locally.
- the_why_of_y 8y agoSynchronous round-trips for atoms were there in 1980s' X11.