From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Dec 20 22:21:54 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0578FE82EE7 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 22:21:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp.rcn.com (smtp.rcn.com [69.168.97.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3CB565586 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 22:21:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=ccOQlTLM c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:117 a=9TgA2UwI6Wy+6BV4wQM/cQ==:17 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=XRQyMpdBKAEA:10 a=ocR9PWop10UA:10 a=48faUk6PgeAA:10 a=kcD68_fZcCixSmEIcWwA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine X-Authed-Username: cm9iZXJ0aHVmZkByY24uY29t Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com smtp.mail=roberthuff@rcn.com; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com header.from=roberthuff@rcn.com; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com smtp.user=roberthuff; auth=pass (PLAIN) Received-SPF: softfail (smtp02.rcn.cmh.synacor.com: transitional domain rcn.com does not designate 209.6.230.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.6.230.48] ([209.6.230.48:37466] helo=jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) by smtp.rcn.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.6.25.56547 r(Core:3.6.25.0)) with ESMTPSA (cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384) id 15/F1-43295-F72EA3A5; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:21:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <23098.57983.262947.67141@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:21:51 -0500 To: Yuri Cc: Johannes Lundberg , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org From: roberthuff@rcn.com Subject: Re: Vote: making wayland=on default In-Reply-To: <3267de19-6e00-a72a-e2a7-abb322ccf7ac@rawbw.com> References: <3267de19-6e00-a72a-e2a7-abb322ccf7ac@rawbw.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 25.3.1 (amd64-portbld-freebsd12.0) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 22:21:54 -0000 Yuri writes: > It appears that this is the case of fixing of something (xorg) > that wasn't/isn't broken in the first place. And if it is > considered broken, then how, in which way? You ask "Is it broken?". I ask "Is there a better way?" Think about gcc: it was developed in the mid '80s, and at the time was pretty dang impressive. But over time ... "provisional" hacks to handle less-common hardware or specific software anomalies became permanently entrenched (or so I am told) even as hardware changed, and both compiler technology and coding practices improved. I think of X the same way. To the list: I salute X for doing its job, but I have no brand loyalty. If something comes along that is some combination of a) more robust, b) faster, and c) as easy to install/manage I'll switch in a heartbeat. (Smaller footprint would be nice too.) Is that Wayland? Fact not (yet) in evidence. Is Wayland-on-FreeBSD in active development? If so: where - other than ports@ - do I go to check the /status quo/? Respectfully, Robert Huff