Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Jan 2011 22:04 UTC
Xfce When we reported on the release of Xfce 4.8, we ignored a statement inside the release announcement about the lack of new features coming to the BSD world. The statement was a bit disconnected from the rest of the press release, but Xfce developer Jannis Pohlmann has published a blog post giving a few more details about the issue.
E-mail Print r 6   · Read More · 84 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 459139
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Delgarde
Member since:
2008-08-19

The correct "solution" here is for "desktop" devs to stop using the kernel features directly and having to continuously rewrite things for udev, HAL, *Kit, u*, etc and instead to write to a standardised abstraction layer with pluggable backends. Something the KDE devs figured out with 4.0 and the creation of Solid and Phonon and similar.


Uh, so you want a standardised abstraction layer with pluggable backends - so, HAL and friends, then? Because that's *exactly* what those packages you're complaining about are!

Reply Parent Score: -1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

"The correct "solution" here is for "desktop" devs to stop using the kernel features directly and having to continuously rewrite things for udev, HAL, *Kit, u*, etc and instead to write to a standardised abstraction layer with pluggable backends. Something the KDE devs figured out with 4.0 and the creation of Solid and Phonon and similar.


Uh, so you want a standardised abstraction layer with pluggable backends - so, HAL and friends, then? Because that's *exactly* what those packages you're complaining about are!
"

No, HAL was a piece of crap that re-invented the wheel on every platform it appeared. What the original poster was talking about is something similar to KDE Solid which provides an abstraction for developers away from concerning what the underlying operating system is.

The problem with that: it has been how long and there is still no FreeBSD backend for KDE Solid. Abstractions are all very nice but if there aren't the people to implement the backends then the whole exercise is a waste of time.

Reply Parent Score: 3

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

There are backends for solid on all kind of platforms including OSX and Windows. Just because there is probably none for FreeBSD doesn't mean the abstraction is unneeded.

Reply Parent Score: 2

smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

The problem with that: it has been how long and there is still no FreeBSD backend for KDE Solid. Abstractions are all very nice but if there aren't the people to implement the backends then the whole exercise is a waste of time.

Has KDE or FreeBSD dropped HAL support? If not, then that's the BSD backend right there. Why would any KDE developer go to the extra effort of interfacing natively with the kernel when HAL is already supported? A BSD dev could do that of course, if they felt it was important enough.

Reply Parent Score: 2

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Kawai touched on this as well, above.

In theory, HAL should have been perfect, in that it would be a portable abstraction layer for hardware access/info/notifications. However, the architecture of it was crap (polling? really? name a single kernel without an event system), and it was very Linux-specific. Writing alternative backends for it was nowhere near simple. There was also no input from non-Linux devs.

Those who ported HAL to non-Linux OSes have nothing good to say about it.

Reply Parent Score: 4