Wayland on FreeBSD

[Dr. Nikolaus Klepp]

Anno domini 17:43:01 Tue, 21 Apr 2020 +0000 (UTC)
 Paul Pathiakis via freebsd-questions scripsit:
>  :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.

If I recall correctly, the Xorg of OpenBSD has all security problems of original Xorg patched, and that for quite some time. Only nobody seams to be interested.

Nik

> 
> Am I making sense?  ( I believe this is what I'm seeing below )
> 
> Paul
> 
>     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?
>     _If_.
>     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?
> 
> 
>             Opportunistically,
> 
> 
>                 Robert Huff
>                 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>   
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 



-- 
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ...