Wayland on FreeBSD

Paul Pathiakis pathiaki2 at yahoo.com
Tue Apr 21 17:43:07 UTC 2020

 :D  I love it when I see reactions to problems like this on FreeBSD.... :D
Personally, I see a need for an alternative weighing though.  There are a HUGE amount of apps that make use of X.  Here's my thought:  Can Xorg learn from Wayland?  Could they, as a stop gap measure, implement a compositor similar to Wayland's method?  Enhance communications via a default TLS methodology that can be imbedded in all X communications?
Don't get me wrong, I believe X is archaic and has been patched constantly to 'enhance' functionality or close security issues and it should be replaced.
However, all functionality needs to stay intact and I would think that there could be some type of shim that allows existing programs to be compiled as they always have for X and it just translates to Wayland's APIs.  If Wayland can offset the speed loss of the shim with its speed enhancements, it should be invisible to the user.

Am I making sense?  ( I believe this is what I'm seeing below )


    On Tuesday, April 21, 2020, 1:30:23 PM EDT, Robert Huff <roberthuff at rcn.com> wrote:  
Polytropon writes:

>  On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:18:51 -0600, @lbutlr wrote:
>  > On 20 Apr 2020, at 02:24, Ihor Antonov <ngor at antonovs.family> wrote:
>  > > But even in 10 years FreeBSD hackers will keep using rotting X11
>  > 
>  > Perhaps. A tiny percentage. The rest will continue as they are now,
>  > avoiding X11 at all costs because it is insecure bloat that
>  > interferes with the desired operation of the machine.
>  Depends. If Wayland can offer all features that X11 offers at
>  the moment, there will probably be no major problem in transition.

    Speaking only for myself (though I think there are a _lot_ of
folks who would agree): I have no particular loyalty to X.  If there's
an alternative that's faster/more secure/easier to {install, maintain,
upgrade}/[other unspecified benefits] ... what the <bleep> are we
waiting for?  Can I be a lab rat?
    What I _think_ I'm hearing is "Wayland is a better solution that
isn't ready yet.  Not fully integrated with FreeBSD; not even ready in
the (current) Platonic ideal."
    Am I wrong?
    Also: if I understand the conversation, Wayland works OK when
client and server are the same machine, but not over a network?


                Robert Huff
freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list