<div dir="ltr">Thanks guys!<div><br></div><div>I've just started to work on xf86-video-nested code. I've written an almost full XCB client (replacing original Xlib one) with some little parts from Xephyr. It still needs a Xlib Display struct until I can port all XKB related code to xcb-xkb.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Next step is identifying common parts between Xephyr and nested. Maybe we can start with hostx.c, which has several features implemented in nested Xlib/XCB client. The big challenge here is replacing all Kd* stuff in Xephyr code to something else. We could even write a kdrive-mini.h file with custom definitions for kdrive struct used in Xephyr, like KdScreenInfo, so we don't need to rename them in Xephyr code.</div>
<div><br></div><div>My work is avaliable at <a href="https://github.com/oiteam/xf86-video-nested">https://github.com/oiteam/xf86-video-nested</a>. Feel free to fork it and send me some pull requests.</div><div><br></div>
<div>
Att.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-06-04 13:56 GMT-03:00 Jamey Sharp <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jamey@minilop.net" target="_blank">jamey@minilop.net</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I'm almost entirely in support of this plan too :-) except I don't think<br>
it will ever make sense to do things like video-nested or VNC as any<br>
combination of video-modesetting and libinput.<br>
<br>
But for everything else, yes, absolutely, throw that code away. :-)<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Jamey<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 12:19:41PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:<br>
> And on the other side, you have people like me who simply want to replace<br>
> all video drivers with -modesetting, and all input drivers with libinput :)<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Jamey Sharp <<a href="mailto:jamey@minilop.net">jamey@minilop.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:07:22AM -0300, Laércio de Sousa wrote:<br>
> > > Hello there!<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Some time ago I've wrotten asking for current status of xf86-video-nested<br>
> > > development. I believe that, for a more robust single-card multiseat<br>
> > setup<br>
> > > with systemd-logind, a "real" Xorg server with some kind of nested video<br>
> > > driver works better than Xephyr, since it still lacks proper input<br>
> > > hotplugging, for example.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > On the other hand, xf86-video-nested have received no relevant<br>
> > improvements<br>
> > > for years, while Xephyr graphics support development is quite active.<br>
> ><br>
> > Wow, I can't believe that capstone project was almost three years ago<br>
> > already.<br>
> ><br>
> > > So I'm thinking on rewriting xf86-video-nested driver based on latest<br>
> > > Xephyr code. A more ambicious idea is to identify and move all video<br>
> > > related code that could be useful for both Xephyr and nested driver to a<br>
> > > shared library, namely "libephyr", and link them against it. We could<br>
> > even<br>
> > > rename xf86-video-nested to xf86-video-ephyr to reflect the new approach.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > I have absolutely no experience in writing video drivers for Xorg, but<br>
> > I'm<br>
> > > open for learning. Any feedback from you will be welcome.<br>
> ><br>
> > In my opinion, this would be great. One of my long-term goals is to have<br>
> > only one X server implementation that anyone cares about, so being able<br>
> > to replace both Xnest and Xephyr with Xorg+video-ephyr sounds good to<br>
> > me. (And ideally, Xdmx would die in a fire.)<br>
> ><br>
> > If I had my way, you wouldn't need to build a shared library, because<br>
> > you'd just replace Xephyr. But practicality suggests that your shared<br>
> > library plan is a better migration strategy.<br>
> ><br>
> > I might suggest that you try hacking stuff into video-nested by<br>
> > copy-paste before you try to figure out what shared library API you<br>
> > need, though. It's much easier to make progress through incrementally<br>
> > testable changes.<br>
> ><br>
> > I hope this helps. :-)<br>
> > Jamey<br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > <a href="mailto:xorg-devel@lists.x.org">xorg-devel@lists.x.org</a>: X.Org development<br>
> > Archives: <a href="http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel</a><br>
> > Info: <a href="http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel</a><br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Jasper<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div><b>Laércio de Sousa</b></div></div>
</div></div>