--- 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

Reply via email to