Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:17:51 +0100 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org> To: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Wayland on FreeBSD Message-ID: <20200422171751.e85396afb993a0c61a248565@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <24224.26111.448437.531092@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <CAFYkXjmfyLZAi1HZe-RE3wLxa6GRNP6GkmtZG-4T2puRDOz0JA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGLDxTX5EeL3YDUJocdOM03sRzUDi3ed9cKuNH99DieZbrhGHg@mail.gmail.com> <5058973.kMyvyFPq5o@amos> <CAB4989B-95E7-43B6-B338-B9524B9D9FDA@kreme.com> <20200421150741.28dd6309.freebsd@edvax.de> <24223.11679.688616.192643@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20200422023243.GA81187@neutralgood.org> <20200422070028.30dd2fb16ccae9b6d9cde901@sohara.org> <24224.11002.960241.607629@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20200422124356.5329c504e03524a59b536cc6@sohara.org> <24224.26111.448437.531092@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:42:55 -0400 Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> wrote: > > Steve O'Hara-Smith writes: > > > > Am I not understanding. or does that sound slow and full of > > > possible failure modes? > > > > It does to me, but I know little to nothing of the innermost > > details. I've looked into Wayland a few times in fair detail and > > have yet to see a benefit. I know X is decried as a security horror > > story, yet active exploits seem curiously rare and it has always > > worked well for me. > > I generally hear three main criticisms: > 1) Full of known/possible exploits and security holes Which never seem to actually cause problems, usually because they're a bit like the cluttered desk and safe with post-it that would be a security problem were they not inside an access controlled area with tight security. > 2) Based on 1980s concepts and hardware (which affects what code > is written and how) Hmm unix is based on 1970s concepts and 1960s hardware, it seems to have aged well. Like X it has accumulated some (nearly) obsolete layers like the incredible range of dumb terminal (mis)designs that curses can cope with and the enormous termcap/terminfo database of capabilities and quirks that drives it. I've seen complaints about the baggage of 1980s style graphics primitives (stippled polygon fills etc.) and fonts which are valid I suppose but it doesn't seem to have got in the way of adding GPU supported acceleration or anti-aliased outline fonts. > 3) "It just grew." (Which contributes to (1).) That I'd have to disagree with, the gap betweem X11Rn and X11Rn+1 was always long and seemed to involve considerable care and there has never been an X12 (despite getting to X11 between 1984 and 1987). -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200422171751.e85396afb993a0c61a248565>