The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? • Hacker News Board

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#711

Post by anthk » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 7:16 PM UTC

ernst_klim wrote: post #571

IvyMike wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Writing things from scratch is usually good, Joel Spolsky wrote a good argument to the contrary: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-... Any good examples of large projects where a rewrite from scratch has been good?

> It’s important to remember that when you start from scratch there is absolutely no reason to believe that you are going to do a better job This is ridiculous. Maybe that's applicable in a very short timescale, but definitely not to the protocol which appeared in 1984. There is a thing called progress, people invent quite a lot through the years: type systems, patterns, design ideas. Not to mention that hardware has…

>11 was done in the age of terminals and absence of hardware acceleration.

IRIX, OpenGL.

They invented it.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#712

Post by anthk » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 7:18 PM UTC

account42 wrote: post #695

phkahler wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> pretty much everything that works on interaction between X clients fails hard It's supposed to fail hard. That isnt just a security hole in X, it's a total lack of security. The notion that any app should be able to monitor or manipulate any other app is archaic and wrong from a security perspective.

> That isnt just a security hole in X, it's a total lack of security. That "security" is useless on a Desktop where you run all programs as the same user. If you want a platform to run locked down "apps" that's fine, just don't expect others to be happy with the cost of that "security" when it provides no benefit for them.

Exactly. Also, XTerm has a secure mode where the keyboard input is locked and no application can read from it ever.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#713

Post by kasabali » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 10:15 PM UTC

utxaa wrote: post #675

wegs wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a magical different userbase Linux has to serve which has somehow bizarre needs not served by thoughtfully-designed older software, but which newer, poorly-designed software somehow meets. Yes, we need a newer web browser, but that could run on old-school Linux/Unix just fine. Aside from that, there isn't anything wrong with nineties Linux which couldn't have been brought up to modern standards with a bit…

i agree with your point. however alsa needed a multiplexing layer, or the equivalent. whereas pulse was the answer i don't know.

> alsa needed a multiplexing layer

It had dmix.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#714

Post by erik_seaberg » Sat, Nov 07, 2020, 2:15 AM UTC

Const-me wrote: post #655

erik_seaberg wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wayland’s mistake is assuming every application has a local GPU. In reality the user has just one GPU attached to his monitor , which is fine for email and gaming, but serious tools run miles away in datacenters. We wouldn’t be rewriting everything in javascript if only we hadn’t forgotten how cool remote X was.

> but serious tools run miles away in datacenters I work on a serious tool, specifically it’s CAM/CAE stuff. Despite Google, Amazon and MS sales people apply pressure to upper management (they want us to move to their clouds and offering gazillions of free compute credits), our software works on desktops and workstations, and I have reasons to believe it gonna stay this way. With recent progress of HPC-targeted CPUs,…

True, that’s one of the domains where you can assume everyone on staff has a really expensive workstation (sometimes for licensing reasons).