summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/open_issues/wayland.mdwn
blob: 67f78b1dab08d0c5622907a7a61ef767f2e52066 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]

[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]

[[!tag open_issue_porting]]

IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-03-18:

    <antrik> Wayland should be very portable. all the system dependencies are
      in the infrastructure, such as DRI
    <antrik> we have had a DRI task (for X.Org) for years
    <antrik> (in fact I would be the right person to implement this,
      considering my background -- by quite frankly, I doubt I'll ever do it)
    <tschwinge> http://xorg.freedesktop.org/wiki/Hurd_Porting

IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-03-20:

    <youlysses> Is wayland something that will be semi-easy to port to the
      hurd? I saw GNOME is heading in this direction.
    <pinotree> wayland at the moment is linux only
    <tschwinge> youlysses: A DRI implementation will be needed.
    <pinotree> that, and libdrm compiling
    <youlysses> So it will take some work ... but theres no *HUGE* design
      decison that would inhibit it?
    <pinotree> i know it uses epoll, for instance
    <tschwinge> youlysses: I cannot judge how complex a DRI system is, and how
      much needs to be designed vs. implemented.