Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Nov 2010 22:35 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Fedora Core Well, what do we have here? It turns out that Ubuntu isn't the only Linux distribution who took a left turn off the highway, now driving on a road that will eventually lead to replacing with Wayland. Fedora's 'graphics cabal', as they call themselves, have explained themselves on Fedora's devel mailing list. They also explain how network transparency can be added to Wayland in a number of different ways, making the mailing list thread intriguing reading material. Also, everybody happy with the headline? No panties in twists this time around...?
Thread beginning with comment 449838
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Actually, I have seen pictures of Wayland running with 2 X servers running in it. If it runs below X so that X and X apps don't have to change, that might be a cool thing. It does require more graphics hardware than X does though, so I doubt it will ever be the default on a server distro. Of course, in 5 years maybe all servers will have 3d graphics on board.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Lennie Member since:

I've never understood why people would want a GUI on a server.

Reply Parent Score: 2

somebody Member since:

actually, it is exactly because they don't want it. strange but true.

you set server into runlevel 3. and when you need some software you simply do this from remote machine:

ssh username@machine -Y whatever_command (like. firefox, system-config-network)

and graphic session runs on local machine not server. server is still in runlevel 3. and you never needed to go into runlevel 5 on server to configure something from gui.

i'm avid network X addict, but as long as wayland options me to run seamless remote session like one before while server is in runlevel 3... i'm all for it. seamless remoting shouldn't be hard to implement with any protocol,... while in runlevel 3? well, that i don't know

Edited 2010-11-13 17:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

gilboa Member since:

You don't need GUI - far from it, all you do need X libraries (inc/ tool-kits such as GTK/QT) and SSHD to run your favorite administration tool.

Better yet, add SSH compression (ssh -C) to the mix and you can actually run X application over a fairly slow DSL or cable line. (Though I would agree that remote X is not a speed daemon - especially when uplink is below 512KB)

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 2

draethus Member since:

I've never understood why people would want a GUI on a server.

Because GPU computing has potential?

Reply Parent Score: 1