What else would we talk about other than the massively [popular|controversial] article about X.org last week. We try and address a number of concerns about the article and common lines of reasoning / misunderstanding. Lastly, we move onto something completely different with topics on Google Chrome on Linux, IE6 and the two details we know about RockMelt: Rock. Melt.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Sounds like you've got a good plan, I look forward to seeing where this goes.
And the corollary would be to also try to get a more exact handle on how Windows handles this, maybe there are lessons in the specifics too. Someone (or maybe more than one?) posted on the original article saying that Windows does is allow a device driver to upgraded, or to restart itself on discovering an error condition (which is trivial if you can do online upgrades anyhow, assuming the driver authors take advantage of it).
I would expect implementing replacement-with-driver-co-operation that to be significantly more straightforward than implementing full sandboxing / fault isolation of unco-operative drivers, so it's worth knowing what they've done.
Member since:2006-02-23
Member since:2006-01-02
Just FYI, to see how some of this support works in windows, look at http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/wddm_timeout.mspx. It's unfortunately not super detailed.
Member since:2005-11-27
How about Kristian Høgsberg? He is working on an alternative graphic stack (Wayland) for Linux AND at the same time works professionally with x11/x.org for red hat.
I wouldn't be suprised if he would like to present what problems exist with x11 from his viewpoint and the advantages of wayland over xserver.
http://groups.google.com/group/wayland-display-server
Member since:
2005-06-29
Let's fist re-iterate that the article was VERY well received. It's now one of the top-most recommended articles on OSNews:
http://www.osnews.com/statistics
But yes, of course more depth would be welcome, and I'm thinking about how to do that properly. However, that was not the point. Sometimes, it does take a blunt hatchet to get a discussion going, and not a scalpel. The blunt hatchet came down, and insane amount of relatively good discussion came out of it. Now, it's time for me to take the scalpel, and take a closer look at the issue.
It's still a fact that X will die if a graphics driver crashes, and that it will take everything with it. We can all agree that that's a Very Bad Thing (tm). I want to find out what it would take to combat this issue - I'd say the best way to find out how is to interview a long-time X developer.
I'm now trying to find out who.
Edited 2009-08-20 16:13 UTC