RFD: setting up a minimal xorg configuration

[Peter Hutterer]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 03:03:23PM +0300, Tiago Vignatti wrote:
> But the modularization and conditionalization of code in Xorg is not
> only about memory saving; I'd say memory saving is the part that I really
> don't care here.
> 
> *Code organization is the key*
> 
> Why Kristian started Wayland? Cause Xorg is a huge pile of ancient code tied
> with a immutable protocol. We hear this all the time from people. If we had
> minimal server, as I'm targeting, I doubt Kristian would start his project.
>
> The ideal X server implementation is not so tough to imagine: a minimal core
> where you can load several modules, drivers, extensions - this all being
> static or dynamic doesn't matter. X would literally fit in any kind of device.
> Embedded, distro and all the rest of the world would live nicely and very
> happy with this implementation.
> 
> If I want to analyse the code to suppress the cursor, for instance, I have to
> understand some old odd extensions, RAMDAC code from 80's and possibly all the
> pointer logic happening in dix. In the worst case the protocol will not let me
> to do so. It's damn hard. The code is huge. The code is messy. Everyone is
> aware about it. On the other hand, modularization of Xorg, having a minimal
> Xorg, means clean code, easy to expand and play with.

messy code isn't fixed by disabling it. it's fixed by _fixing_ it.

> IMHO, Keith, as the RM and the one that ultimately says which code goes
> upstream, should be very clear about this sort of issue. I can't discuss
> future development of X without understand his thoughts. (Sometimes I feel
> that our development process is living in Baazar model without someone
> dictating it, which doesn't make sense. No offences please, Keith!).

Cheers,
  Peter