Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 05:49:16
Message-Id: 20170904174840.1a93dcfa@katipo2.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 23:37:34 +0000 (UTC)
2 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
3
4
5 > Vague/generic agreed in general. I'm not sure enough what you meant
6 > by double-dipping (tho I have a couple ideas) to say I agree there.
7
8 Yeah. To an extent these days its just "app" practically *implies* a
9 GUI.
10
11 It doesn't, strictly, speaking, but its just such a generic term I have
12 a hard time imagining somebody using it as a classifier.
13
14
15 > How many of these xorg-suite apps have-been/will-be actually ported to
16 > wayland? I was under the impression that most of them will not be
17 > ported, and it'll be the up to whatever compositor and accompanying
18 > toolkit you choose to provide that functionality, as they generally
19 > already do... to a point. Certainly the compositor (aka
20 > super-window-manager) is the only app allowed to control/delegate many
21 > of the functions xset, xrandr, etc, set for xorg in common, for
22 > security reasons, because wayland simply doesn't let one app mess with
23 > and spy on another app's input stream, for instance, as X does. If
24 > only the compositor and/or apps it specifically authenticates for the
25 > purpose are allowed to do such settings, it quickly becomes a
26 > toolkit/DE function, and generic versions don't make a lot of sense
27 > as they simply won't work.
28
29 Well, in this case it was more an example of "a tool that has some
30 desktop mechanics, but does not in fact have any Graphical User
31 Interface".
32
33 "xset" augments *the environment itself*
34
35 And I simply reasoned that, this, being Unix, we'd likely have
36 equivalent, GUI-less applications that perform various display related
37 services, like xbacklight, or transset, or xrandr.
38
39 I'm not saying those binaries would literally be ported, only that
40 their utility is such that I'd expect to see equivalents/analogues
41 emerge for wayland.
42
43 ( intel-gpu-tools for example have neither GUI, or really X specific
44 behaviour aside from its gpu-overlay )
45 >
46 > In which case, keeping the "legacy" x11-* names for such x-specific
47 > apps, the better to eventually deprecate, mask, and send off to the
48 > user-maintained "X-sunset" overlay, may make the most sense and will
49 > almost certainly be less trouble.
50 >
51 > And where there is a port, as presumably there is or will be for
52 > many of the x11-libs, does it make sense to keep separate x11-*
53 > and wayland-* categories where they differ, or throw them all together
54 > in a heap?
55
56 Right, there's going to be plenty of examples of things that aren't
57 portable, and will need to stay in perpetuity in x11-* . x11-drivers
58 are probably a good example. Though I'm in no hurry to deprecate X11,
59 wayland will take even longer than systemd for me to go "Ok, yes, now
60 we should switch everyone to this"
61
62 > Meanwhile, the objection to "desktop-*" is that it may well look about
63 > as relevant in a few years as "mainframe-*" would look today, due to
64 > mobile, wearables, and possibly ultimately injectibles.
65 >
66 > > IDK.
67 > >
68 > > I'm not committed to anything I've said here, just food for
69 > > thought.
70 >
71 > Same here. My biggest concern is simply avoiding, if possible,
72 > setting up new categories now, only to have to redo them in 2-5 when
73 > hindsight makes them look stupid. It may not be possible, but to the
74 > extent it is... Other than that, I've no particular shed color
75 > preference, other than don't make it 50 characters long or something
76 > so exotic we have to refer to it as "the category formerly known as
77 > x11-*." =:^)
78 >
79
80 Yeah. At this point there's not much value in a switch. And I'm not
81 entirely happy with either "gui-" or "desktop-". "x11-" is, for all its
82 warts, more useful than either of those still.
83
84 I'm tempted to suggest something like "ux-", which conceptually
85 encompasses GUI/UI/Display concerns, and having an "x" gives a nod to
86 its legacy as being "x" without it being part of the definition :)
87
88 Its also nice to keep the sort ordering reasonably close:
89
90 sys-*
91 virtual
92 www-*
93 x11-*
94 xfce-*
95
96 Becomes
97
98 sys-*
99 ux-*
100 virtual
101 www-*
102 xfce-*
103
104 Which should help anyone confused why the category they're looking for
105 isn't in /usr/portage any more when they throw an `ls` down there.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>
[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>