News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?. Parent comment

Re:The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? by ddevault on Sunday October 25, 2020 @03:29PM (#24889158)
Another obsolete "fact" about Wayland which hasn't been true since 2015. Which is all the anti-Wayland propegandists seem to be able to come up with.

This was addressed by the linux-dmabuf protocol extension (which also works on *BSD, despite the name). The mesa route has been deprecated for years.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? by ywei3410 on Sunday October 25, 2020 @04:01PM (#24889420)
I do believe that the parent comment was unfair; it is possible to implement a compositor without libwayland — but I do think that there is some truth in that the C structures are the de-facto protocol from the client-side. For example graphics drivers seem to expect wl_display and wl_surface [1] rather than, say expecting the object id.

It’s not as though this is different under X though and isn’t a criticism of Wayland.

[1] https://www.khronos.org/registry/vulkan/specs/1.2-extensions...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? by gpm on Sunday October 25, 2020 @04:12PM (#24889494)
> isn’t a criticism of Wayland.

Indeed, my comment is merely observing that wayland is both a protocol and a code base for all practical purposes, I'm trying to leave the criticism to other people ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]