On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Fons Adriaensen <fons@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:14:31PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>>
>> > This excludes Windows (TM), but again, I couln't care less.
>>
>> It also excludes OS X, which despite having "X11 support" isn't really
>> what you mean by "supports X11".
>
> You can run X11 apps in OSX. So you can have the host side of a plugin
> library that is an X11 client.
it will not be able interact in a direct way with any windows created
with Cocoa.
> If the underlying layer is not X11 this is just the same. Every
> system needs some abstraction of 'an area of the screen that is
> managed as a basic unit'. In X11 that is represented by a window
> ID, in other systems it will be something similar.
this was actually precisely my point. but you indicated that you
didn't care about anything that wasn't X11. my point was that X11 is
not an appropriate "abstraction" for this purpose, whereas what you
just described is.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_%28display_server_protocol%29
>
> ATM it doesn't even provide network transparancy. Which means you can't
> even do the equivalent of ssh -X.
AFAIU, there are no plans for it to do so. Since X clients can be
hosted by a rootless X server running on top of Wayland, the plan is
to continue to allow X to be used when network transparency matters,
thus allowing Wayland to focus on a efficiently and productively
implementing a drawing/display/rendering model that doesn't make very
much sense across a network (in a word: compositing).
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Feb 22 16:15:07 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 22 2011 - 16:15:07 EET