Wayland Ported To DragonFlyBSD (phoronix.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Wayland 1.9 and the reference Weston compositor have been ported to DragonFlyBSD. Significant changes were made to get Wayland/Weston running, and you must either already be running an X.Org Server or be using the Linux-ported Radeon and Intel kernel mode-setting drivers, plus jump through a few setup steps.

Comments

Re:I find it amusing

[Anonymous Coward]

Yada yada, yoda yoda. Get this. There are some of us that spend their nights and weekends making free software. You don't have to use our software. Distributions don't have to package our software. But they do, and no matter how many swear words you know is not relevant. The distributions make their own decisions and if you don't like that then you can start your own distribution with just the software you want. End of discussion.

Re:I find it amusing

[bluefoxlucid]

Old init ran init scripts. New init manages complex dependencies, makes sure the system state stays proper, journals failures, and generally does a lot of system component integration. People prefer cobbled together over complex architecture.

Re:I find it amusing

[Lunix Nutcase]

Plenty of people are asking why we want to fork lift X out for something completely different.

And how many of them are current X.org developers? Because most of the Wayland developers are long time X.org and previously FreeX86 developers.

Lots of people are arguing the handful of real and actual problems that do exist with X can by solved by adding (some of which has already happened) a few more extensions and that if you don't care about the old X protocol stuff well don't use its mostly harmless to you just sitting there.

Then those "lots of people" should put up or shut up. On the other hand, the people who actually have been trying to do that with X.org for nearly a decade say its horrendous and thus that's why they're working on Wayland.

Re:I find it amusing

[chmod a x mojo]

Simple, the Kernel does one thing, that being be a kernel. Same with X11, it is a display server. They both do the ONE thing that they were designed to do, and do it well.... in the case of X11 it is debatable, but you can usually get some form of display running even if it is horribly inefficient. The UNIX philosophy is looked at two ways:
1 - many smaller programs that can be combined to do a task.
OR
2 - do one thing and do it well.

SystemD, what started out as an init system + service manager ( see how it's doing more than one thing from the get-go? ), now does init + service manager + DHCP + NTP + login + its own fucked up form of journaling + who the fuck knows what else was thrown in recently.

Bit of a difference there, no? And it's not like you can easily ( as far as I know anyways* ) pick and choose what "modular" parts you use without recompiling the whole damn thing. That also means any vulnerability in say NTP would require a full on recompile of the whole source instead of the "modular" NTP portion only.

*If it's not true, I would appreciate getting pointed in the right direction to see where I may be wrong...

Re:I find it amusing

[PPH]

These days, the X server doesn't do anything,

What about receive connections from remote x clients and put them on the display.

Linux/*NIX is used for more than gaming. Shocking, I know. But you'll get over it.

Re:I find it amusing

[PPH]

install both X11 and wayland and run one or the other

And what happens when some major app switches to the Wayland libs, leaving X networking behind? Sure, there's an X compatibility layer. But given the attitude of Wayland supporters ("nobody networks clients anymore, so lets throw this stuff out") I don't anticipate support for that feature to be long lived.

There are too many people running around, both in the systemd and Wayland camps who think that, because they don't do something or understand it, it just doesn't need to be done. Why don't we all take up a collection to buy them GameBoys or XBoxes and keep them away from important systems stuff?

RDP is NOT a replacement for network transparency

[billstewart]

RDP is simply not an adequate substitute for a network-transparent window system. Yes, it'll let you do some things badly, and other things mediocrely, but that's about it. And I haven't seen any evidence that the Wayland folks understood that early on, so I haven't kept up with Wayland when there's working X.Org.