Re: FVWM: fvwm3?

[Jason Tibbitts]

> John McCue  writes:

> I heard of waypipe, but from what I understand is for it to work, the
> remote system needs to have wayland too.

Well, it's for running a wayland application on a remote machine
displaying on your local wayland-running machine.  If you want to run an
X11 application on a remote displaying on your local wayland-running
machine, you just use ssh as usual.  Basically any machine with wayland
is going to have Xwayland (the X11 component) and will start it when
needed, though I guess some distribution who really gets behind wayland
could not compile that part if they really didn't want to.

> So if for example you want to run a remote X application on a BSD (or
> AIX), it will not work.

Nope, works just fine (besides that usual caveat about endianness
mismatches that you get with all X servers this decade).  I'm running
wayland right now (with the KDE desktop) and can fire up a local xterm
or ssh to a different machine and run xterm and it works just fine.
Interestingly, it appears that it's actually the window manager
(kwin_wayland) that ends up starting Xwayland.  None of it runs as root
(just the display manager, which in my case is SDDM).

> To me, this indicates it is Linux (or maybe Wayland) specific.

Nothing there indicates Linux; I don't personally know if the code is
portable but I doubt anyone is going out of their way to make it
difficult.  Somehow I don't think you'll see many AIX machines running
wayland in any case.  Of course waypipe is wayland specific; that is its
function.  For X11 forwarding, ssh handles things as it always has.

Now, I don't know if you could use the really old-style remote display
stuff where ssh is not involved.  Xwayland really is a proper X server
so the ability to do it is probably down in there somewhere.

 - J<

Re: FVWM: fvwm3?

[Jason Tibbitts]

> Robert Heller  writes:

> I believe Wayland does not support that sort of thing.

It does, actually, but not exactly the same way.  Look up "waypipe".
One does get the impression that it's all an afterthought, though.

 - J<

Re: Is fvwm-announce still used?

[Jason Tibbitts]

Thomas Adam  writes:

> When I was writing the notes for the release procedure, one of the questions I
> meant to mail out here was to ask if the fvwm-announce mailing list is still
> used and/or has subscribers?

It still has subscribers (567 currently) though I'm sure a few of those
will bounce since we haven't had an announcement in a while.

I generally sent an announcement there when I put a new version in place
(back when I was in the pipeline for that).

 - J<