From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Apr 22 03:26:58 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A54432C461F for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 03:26:58 +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 496QpT5sWnz4bwY for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 03:26:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=rcn.com; s=20180516; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@rcn.com; t=1587526016; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=ypRWJVICcz+jPOk6/SWIZ69WwKw=; b=Jiw7tNSJSy/9Td/u1V6K+RyDnRde2OQJ9RaxIQbPuuE8Yi4JGj2P01+t9NH5eMtg 5gVjfJqLeC98fv8jp0WpyrrAINyPQTRlKfrlNPueHyBKCa8vqh3Ny86ZU2h3AyIQ W4dEauheWQKCgT+mKZ4KwifxXfhnX4OLHYMnUi6t7MhQhNi4KraJN2aUQ8Ll9S5j TraI9y5zYlbtLaRimVDF/BwnWES8jNvWrHM+rOE1IX5NlL+KGZx7wFaWkoN2C3d6 /FHjLBovmk8ggIvSewUMuD7joHA26elLkDadYVoXrQG/8XK97MKxZpLxL/Q9pEXL XPBg2z80PraxRH5cuJ+T5A==; X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=Z5uS40ZA 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=cl8xLZFz6L8A:10 a=48faUk6PgeAA:10 a=mzwXpDPPZQuoAauZ6SUA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine X-Authed-Username: cm9iZXJ0aHVmZkByY24uY29t Received: from [209.6.230.48] ([209.6.230.48:20232] 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 B9/0B-10869-089BF9E5; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:26:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <24223.47488.85521.628719@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:26:56 -0400 From: Robert Huff To: "Kevin P. Neal" Cc: Polytropon , FreeBSD , "\@lbutlr" Subject: Re: Wayland on FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <20200422023243.GA81187@neutralgood.org> References: <5058973.kMyvyFPq5o@amos> <20200421150741.28dd6309.freebsd@edvax.de> <24223.11679.688616.192643@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20200422023243.GA81187@neutralgood.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 26.3 (amd64-portbld-freebsd13.0) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 496QpT5sWnz4bwY X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=rcn.com header.s=20180516 header.b=Jiw7tNSJ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=rcn.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of roberthuff@rcn.com designates 69.168.97.78 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roberthuff@rcn.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.61 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[rcn.com:s=20180516]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:69.168.97.0/24]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; IP_SCORE(-1.51)[ip: (-8.99), ipnet: 69.168.97.0/24(0.73), asn: 36271(0.75), country: US(-0.05)]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[rcn.com.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[rcn.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[rcn.com,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[78.97.168.69.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36271, ipnet:69.168.97.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[78.97.168.69.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 03:26:58 -0000 Kevin P. Neal writes: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 01:30:07PM -0400, Robert Huff wrote: > > Also: if I understand the conversation, Wayland works OK when > > client and server are the same machine, but not over a network? > > I thought I read that Wayland considers access over the network to be a > solved problem without having to build it into the lowest levels of the > graphics stack. Remote Desktop, VNC, etc., all give network access. What > you miss is intermingling of windows from several machines. But is that > such a common use case that it should be designed for from the start? Define "common". :-) I can bear witness to having done so (using X) multiple times over a 30 year career. In no case was it the only possible solution; in several it was clearly superior to the alternatives. That various major players implement and actively maintain some version suggests the concept is valuable. Anyone else? Respectfully, Robert Huff