From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Dec 21 08:50:35 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 BE263E86E4B for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:50:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from johalun0@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wr0-x22d.google.com (mail-wr0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5100A7CF49 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:50:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from johalun0@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wr0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id s66so24508429wrc.9 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:50:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ve9Bu8X9dI8Z0LUhZqAUlrzv1//VwiQTDsNJV0Jxzj8=; b=CV8qOOY4O+K4kQ7/kFlodGbG6uITlMYym6oKX/hjPznvb84limxuOssZgiVmsU/G3D Xg8ATKmVlnHmuoUHsiRfIGV9ZdZYmsKZnZLa77B746ci/6q8EPNf1gyma3Bu71I6gMsu KgPZyPJUA0lDJqulpFy2aOmSFECILSGxXYv8MDz8vfBXSZRh3gXmcCWlgKm10oGxN1cN S083UzUrafb9B9tpT+2e5iOSR7uWT1rdHItrEZ0YLzScGbhD6X65VKswS1g2Gsr8lOpZ MrQpelCgbV4ZhWSC7487Wyz13tMue89UGXX7cGNzc4VnJeSGwZkQEFY/tK9xX/+iiz2q IVsA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ve9Bu8X9dI8Z0LUhZqAUlrzv1//VwiQTDsNJV0Jxzj8=; b=LEcQWc3gpoRa4ZcNtEa8k6cRYxfRTHz1+kw75TCaCyorAFffbED0NS1tz+77GI1ONW lOavEVj6Se6UmZ8enGdGqXwlQ3/LO3b25V8917Xr/nZJhsoLUTP+q4PmeM/HDNH0pDLV sw4Ka3id++Xd+ziuDglI7744c0OUAZhvqb3Zrls4iJtJj1f4qtSLcWVt+fwhpqiYwje1 Usvpw+aAPcMLmVZ/Q9XQ49+jIMb/aEgVm4Z0w9g1LR2Y9143bJ7KcDZlJfqmCYG0nIPp JFG+CzabvSNxWXthI1SIyMZNIS10Zkq74MggY1D9tNY3r+qz3uil7HKxk0Kp5ymaiL7t JFFA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIERho88n/9O2UDKOwPRE+BDDYHLxyBbswjIJZaf7vlLf24gCzD GkvEYXNCsoHAYx9bPDT4CPTfm370oTzJEfaP1NY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouQGN9TPwIx52/Zz4N3o1+nYvF09W68KcnBC/BewhtFsqinlUqws2paLINcUESI1r/jtNcPGZsZmFzYWY2JPNI= X-Received: by 10.223.200.133 with SMTP id k5mr800890wrh.215.1513846233238; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:50:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.197.68 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:49:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9142f3e2938c84bd838b3764197226be@udns.ultimatedns.net> <8EDCE5A5-391E-4529-9713-79901739CC6F@grem.de> From: Johannes Lundberg Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:49:52 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Vote: making wayland=on default To: Kevin Oberman Cc: Michael Gmelin , portmaster@bsdforge.com, FreeBSD Ports ML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:50:35 -0000 Thanks for the explanation, Kevin. I should have included more background information about what Wayland is and what turning it on by default means in more detail. Again to clarify, enabling Wayland by default does not change anything, it simply adds more options. Similar to adding a X11 window manager, you have the option to use it but don't have to... On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Michael Gmelin wrote: > >> >> >> > On 20. Dec 2017, at 18:50, Chris H wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:13:43 +0000 >> said >> > >> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:23:59 +0000 "Johannes Lundberg" < >> johalun0@gmail.com> >> > said >> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Chris H >> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 09:20:20 +0000 "Johannes Lundberg" >> >> >> >> > said >> >> > >> >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> >> >> I want to suggest that we enable wayland by default. In current state >> >> >> having some parts of wayland in ports is basically useless the >> >> >> end-users themselves re-build gtk30 and mesa-libs with wayland >> >> >> enabled. >> >> >> >> >> >> libwayland-egl.so from mesa-libs and the extra libraries and headers >> >> >> from gtk30 adds like a few KB, a drop in the ocean compared to xorg >> >> >> packages. (might be something more that I missed) >> >> >> >> >> >> Personally I see no reason not to make it default on, even with >> >> >> flavors coming up. For any Desktop user (as well as embedded devices >> >> >> like IVI-systems and whatnot), Wayland is the future. There's no >> >> >> escaping that. >> >> >> >> >> >> Wayland has been quite usable on FreeBSD for over a year now but >> >> >> access to it is limited due to the extra efforts required to use it. >> >> >> >> >> >> If we are to compare with the other guys, several Linux distros are >> >> >> already switching to wayland-based compositors as default window >> >> >> server. >> >> >> >> >> >> What do you think? >> >> > >> >> > IMHO it's (still) too early. Too much other X(org) related work >> >> > still being completed. In fact, I just built a new dev box to >> >> > track 12 (CURRENT), and this was the first time I was not required >> >> > to pre generate a config file for Xorg. I was only required to >> >> > inform /usr/local/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/nvidia-driver.conf that >> >> > the driver was "nvidia", not "nv". Everything work(s|ed) famously. >> >> > A real treat. I'm also a bit concerned about the progress (or lack >> >> > there of) on network transparency. >> >> > I (personally) could conceive it as a KERNEL OPTION, but would not >> >> > want to see it in the Default kernel. >> >> > >> >> > Well, those are *my* thoughts. Because you asked. :-) >> >> > >> >> > --Chris >> >> > >> >> Thanks for your feedback! >> >> Just to clarify, we're not talking about changing any defaults that >> >> would impact or change users' choice of desktop. We only want to >> >> enable Wayland compositors as an alternative to X (leaving X as is). >> >> This does not break or modify anything existing. It does not force you >> >> to do anything differently. It simply adds a couple of libraries that >> >> you won't use unless you run Wayland stuff (if you install qt5/gtk30 >> >> and mesa-libs). >> >> The reference to Linux making it default might have been unclear. >> >> Since FreeBSD doesn't have a default desktop, it's hard to change. It >> >> is and will continue to be up to the end user what they choose to use, >> >> we only add more options :) >> > Thanks for the informative reply, Johannes. >> > So no kernel (libs/extensions)? >> > Hmm, gtk3. Why is it not possible to make the Wayland stuff a sub >> > package/option? I think this is the preferred track/policy anyway. >> > I do this for all the ports I currently maintain. IOW any DE related >> > stuff I install, that uses GNOME related material, will pull in gtk3, >> > which, as I understand you say, will ultimately pull in Weston,mesa,... >> > is that correct? While I understand, you indicate it's only a few Kb. >> > I think it's cruft/(unnecessary)overhead. Which, in and of itself >> > seems insignificant. But in the "big picture", and over many (100's) >> > of builds/installations, is *not* insignificant. This also dismisses >> > the security related work, maintaining extra un(used|needed) material. >> > I suppose some will think that I'm just being nit-picky. But IMHO >> > I'm not. This sort of thing, if overlooked, *does* affect the bottom >> > line. >> > >> > Thanks again, Johannes! >> > >> > P.S. I have nothing against Wayland. I'm just not ready to run it >> > on anything "production" related, just yet. :-) >> > >> > --Chris >> > >> >> The key is to have it in a state that easy to maintain and allows people >> to install it using pkg install without conflicting with X, so you can >> switch back and forth easily. I'm also not ready to switch to wayland yet >> (favorite window manager not available, so many custom configurations I >> came up with over the years etc.), but giving users an easy way to test it >> (or use it, as it's becoming more and more mainstream now) is a good thing. >> >> Having a modern, working, out of the box desktop (read: no custom kernel >> builds, no need to use ports, a laptop is the point of first contact for >> many potential users) is incredibly important for proliferation and >> compared to the total size of binaries required to run X, I think the >> usefulness of providing wayland easily outweighs the extra overhead. >> >> Yours, >> Michael > > > There seems to be general confusion on what Wayland is and what it does. > Anyone who worked with X11 back in the R4 and R5 days probably understands > the issues with the client/server protocol. I remember all of the > optimizations needed to get it to perform even passably on VMS, most of > which went into R6. But the protocol is still painfully primitive and > awkward in today's world. It really has no concept of compositors and that > makes everything much more expensive on both the server and client sides. I > really expected something like Wayland to show up 15 or 20 years ago. > > Putting Wayland into the system has a minimal cost in disk space. Unless > you choose to use it, it has no impact on application performance or size. > It mostly means that, if you want to use Wayland, you can o so without > rebuilding lots of stuff from ports. The packages will have be built with > ll of the required linkages. Does not matter what desktop you use, though > many of them may not yet work well (or at all) with Wayland, many will and > you wilol be able to try Wayland out easily. > > YES!!! Wayland support should be present when available. It's all upside. > -- > Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer > E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com > PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"