--- Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A simpler, more direct, infrastructure to the > low-level driver might help.
X has served us well for a long time but I just don't think it is sufficient to be the standard video platform for desktop Linux over the next ten years. We're not going to replace X overnight, but we need a path to slowly evolve it. I am amazed at the rate of change in the kernel, but X hardly seems to change at all. How can we speed things up? I agree that X is very complicated to work on. Mozilla has the same problem, everything is connected to everything. There is no way to work on a piece of Mozilla without working on the whole thing. Mozilla is trying to fix this but they still have a long ways to go. For me, a layered approach where each piece can be compiled, used and tested independently would make X much more manageable. Something like this: Kernel level - fusion of DRM and FB, libDRM OpenGL - Mesa + DRI Xserver rest of X I'm sure people with more experience on X can divide it in a better way, but the key is in dividing it into smaller, more digestible chunks. These layers need to build and run independently. The DRI tree has close to 10,000 files in it right now and DRI isn't even a complete X tree. That's an awful lot of code to read and understand as a single package. ===== Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
