3 ms·

Because X is not getting much development at this point (personally I still use i3, haven’t switched to Sway, the present works fine for me).

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
torstenvl 9mo ago
Hmm? Seems to be getting plenty of development. https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/activity https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/activity
- bee_rider 9mo ago
  That’s a fork, which is fine. But for example, users from most mainstream distros will have to compile it themselves. I guess we’ll see if that development is ever applied to the main branch, or if it supplants the main X branch. At the moment, though… if that’s the future of X, then it is fair to be a little bit unsure if it is going to stick, right?
- theamk 9mo ago
  the kind that introduces regressions? there is a reason lead developer of X11Libre left Xorg project, they did not like broken code: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1760 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1760 (and many more if you search)
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
gmueckl 9mo ago
This argument is actually backwards: one of the goals of the wayland project is to draw development away from X. If wayland didn't exist, people would have worked on X11 a lot more.
- _flux 9mo ago
  It's not an argument in the first place: it's describing the current situation. Wayland does exist, and did draw development away from X.
  - gmueckl 9mo ago
    Not quite. Wayland was created in part to draw developers away from X. Seeking buy-in from Xorg developers specifically was a big part of it.
    - bee_rider 9mo ago
      This seems to be implying that the creation of Wayland had some motivation that was essentially malicious toward X. Is that right?
      - gmueckl 9mo ago
        This question sounds to me like you suspect some outright evil getting projected here. That would go too far. The wayland project tried to get the support of X developers early so that they could become a sort of "blessed" X successor early on. Plenty of earlier replacement attempts have failed because they couldn't get bigger community support, so this had to be part of a successful strategy. Any detrimental effects on X from that move were never a direct goal, as far as I am aware, just a consequence.
        bee_rider 9mo ago
        Yes, I do interpret your “draw development away from X” as suggesting an attempt to damage X (sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but I do think my interpretation was not really that unreasonable). This “blessed successor” without and detrimental effects as a main goal: that’s pretty close to my understanding of the project. IIRC some X people were involved from the beginning, right?
        davidgerard 9mo ago
ok123456 9mo ago
That's X.org, which is controlled by the Free Desktop Foundation. The OpenBSD people are still working on Xenocara, and it introduces actual security via pledge system calls.
- bee_rider 9mo ago
  That seems pretty interesting. I guess it relies on BSD plumbing though? Funny enough, the my first foray into these sort of operating systems was BSD, but it was right when I was getting started. So I don’t really know which of my troubles were caused by BSD being tricky (few probably), and which were caused by my incompetence at the time (most, probably). One of these days I’ll try it again…
  - zamalek 9mo ago
    Yup, "pledge" is one of my BSD envies. Namespaces and unshare are significantly more complex and we're still told not to use them as a security barrier (which is explicitly in scope for pledge).
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

torstenvl 9mo ago

Hmm? Seems to be getting plenty of development. https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/activity https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/activity

bee_rider 9mo ago
That’s a fork, which is fine. But for example, users from most mainstream distros will have to compile it themselves. I guess we’ll see if that development is ever applied to the main branch, or if it supplants the main X branch. At the moment, though… if that’s the future of X, then it is fair to be a little bit unsure if it is going to stick, right?
theamk 9mo ago
the kind that introduces regressions? there is a reason lead developer of X11Libre left Xorg project, they did not like broken code: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1760 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1760 (and many more if you search)
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]

gmueckl 9mo ago

This argument is actually backwards: one of the goals of the wayland project is to draw development away from X. If wayland didn't exist, people would have worked on X11 a lot more.

_flux 9mo ago
It's not an argument in the first place: it's describing the current situation. Wayland does exist, and did draw development away from X.
- gmueckl 9mo ago
  Not quite. Wayland was created in part to draw developers away from X. Seeking buy-in from Xorg developers specifically was a big part of it.
  - bee_rider 9mo ago
    This seems to be implying that the creation of Wayland had some motivation that was essentially malicious toward X. Is that right?
    - gmueckl 9mo ago
      This question sounds to me like you suspect some outright evil getting projected here. That would go too far. The wayland project tried to get the support of X developers early so that they could become a sort of "blessed" X successor early on. Plenty of earlier replacement attempts have failed because they couldn't get bigger community support, so this had to be part of a successful strategy. Any detrimental effects on X from that move were never a direct goal, as far as I am aware, just a consequence.
      - bee_rider 9mo ago
        Yes, I do interpret your “draw development away from X” as suggesting an attempt to damage X (sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but I do think my interpretation was not really that unreasonable). This “blessed successor” without and detrimental effects as a main goal: that’s pretty close to my understanding of the project. IIRC some X people were involved from the beginning, right?
      - davidgerard 9mo ago

ok123456 9mo ago

That's X.org, which is controlled by the Free Desktop Foundation. The OpenBSD people are still working on Xenocara, and it introduces actual security via pledge system calls.

bee_rider 9mo ago
That seems pretty interesting. I guess it relies on BSD plumbing though? Funny enough, the my first foray into these sort of operating systems was BSD, but it was right when I was getting started. So I don’t really know which of my troubles were caused by BSD being tricky (few probably), and which were caused by my incompetence at the time (most, probably). One of these days I’ll try it again…
- zamalek 9mo ago
  Yup, "pledge" is one of my BSD envies. Namespaces and unshare are significantly more complex and we're still told not to use them as a security barrier (which is explicitly in scope for pledge).

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]