From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Apr 21 17:30:10 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 C21C02B17B6 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:30:10 +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 4969Ys5nGFz3DZJ for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:30:09 +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=1587490208; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=1atw9Di6aD86sNlHadSF7LKfG0A=; b=XB+6iisFYGEF35MguY6Z35iUhy+8cl4k6qSHQ0PKC+eYLjVH3ChFNhsZJZ6K9aYk QRqybziEoFtEqkzWElT/Z47l5KrgBlsTW0bl6B1+F39eaYzsDQqH2RgXQzkT7Vl5 LV2rUMc3imvUw5OCoMTYIkgYeUn1AdKn6LrzFGEZHDrSipgJsHgl6nAqf6KOrQLb 6Pz4Gw45YyXN0AKFBBMfkwB218qw8cUi/7cwB/3S3TxMqc6otEkT1OK9RLygM9hZ 6X34lnsopSBeeppt36eq6Bk7fzJZU8CDJrzo6gFNZLEsSd0Q+KivABgHUNBu/jHL fQZPIgjm+Z6fCbRyBeGQxQ==; 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=tLKPmnsIuPsP_IQPIccA: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] ([209.6.230.48:51510] 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 E6/CE-10869-0AD2F9E5; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:30:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <24223.11679.688616.192643@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:30:07 -0400 From: Robert Huff To: Polytropon Cc: "\@lbutlr" , FreeBSD Subject: Re: Wayland on FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <20200421150741.28dd6309.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <5058973.kMyvyFPq5o@amos> <20200421150741.28dd6309.freebsd@edvax.de> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 26.3 (amd64-portbld-freebsd13.0) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4969Ys5nGFz3DZJ X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=rcn.com header.s=20180516 header.b=XB+6iisF; 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)[3]; 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: (-8.98), ipnet: 69.168.97.0/24(0.74), 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: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:30:10 -0000 Polytropon writes: > On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:18:51 -0600, @lbutlr wrote: > > On 20 Apr 2020, at 02:24, Ihor Antonov wrote: > > > But even in 10 years FreeBSD hackers will keep using rotting X11 > > > > Perhaps. A tiny percentage. The rest will continue as they are now, > > avoiding X11 at all costs because it is insecure bloat that > > interferes with the desired operation of the machine. > > Depends. If Wayland can offer all features that X11 offers at > the moment, there will probably be no major problem in transition. Speaking only for myself (though I think there are a _lot_ of folks who would agree): I have no particular loyalty to X. If there's an alternative that's faster/more secure/easier to {install, maintain, upgrade}/[other unspecified benefits] ... what the are we waiting for? Can I be a lab rat? _If_. What I _think_ I'm hearing is "Wayland is a better solution that isn't ready yet. Not fully integrated with FreeBSD; not even ready in the (current) Platonic ideal." Am I wrong? Also: if I understand the conversation, Wayland works OK when client and server are the same machine, but not over a network? Opportunistically, Robert Huff