On 07/01/15 18:21, Javier Jardón wrote:
On 7 January 2015 at 13:51, Sam Thursfield
> Hi Javier
> Sorry for the delay looking at this!
No problem at all!
> It seems that this does more than 'add xwayland support to the xserver' --
> it actually disables the main xorg XServer as well, so that X can only be
> run inside Wayland now, not on its own.
> that may well be what we want -- is there any Baserock reference system or
> downstream consumer of Baserock that needs X still? -- but we should be
> clear about what's going to happen if this patch is merged.
Yeah, sorry about that. Certainly the title should be more descriptive.
As far as I know, no reference system uses X at all, thats why I tried
to enable the xwayland support with adding as less dependencies as
I also remember to ask in the IRC and I think thats the feedback I get
there (only xwayland support, not the complete xserver)
I think thats the way to go, as even some distros are thinking on
enabling wayland by default soon.
Saying that, if we still want to keep a full xserver, we can ignore
patches 2 and 3, ans simply enable xwayland in patch 1.
OK, thanks for the explanation. Although we don't use X11 in our
reference systems, it may be that a downstream consumer of Baserock
wants to use X11 without Wayland, and we could make things a bit easier
for them by doing this as two separate patch series: "Add xwayland
support" and "Remove support for all X servers other than Xwayland".
That way, if someone *does* want Baserock in X, they can revert "Remove
support for all X servers other than Xwayland", and it won't break all
the reference systems that need Xwayland.
So, +1 with the above caveat ... the "Add support for Xwayland" patch is
so simple that I'd be happy for this to be done at merge time, no need
to send it for review.
Sam Thursfield, Codethink Ltd.
Office telephone: +44 161 236 5575