Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×


FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495359)

Yay for me!!!!

Pissy frost! (-1, Troll)

anonymous coword (615639) | about 11 years ago | (#6495360)

Its a scorching 32 degrees centigrade where I am, but to you slashdotters, its pissy frost time!


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495635)

This is an American site, I would appreciate it if you would speak American.

A Call For Action! (-1, Offtopic)

James A. A. Joyce (681634) | about 11 years ago | (#6495369)

My dear trolling friends, acquaintances, those I have never heard of, those I never hear of and those I shall never hear of, we, both the Slashdot community, super-Slashdot community and the trolling subcommunity are facing a mass crisis upon all levels. Crapflooders, article text trolls, and representatives of what few organisations there are are currently scattered and weak, possessing none of the puissance necessary to overturn the vast heap of articles and book reviews. All of the teeming subcultures of Slashdot and the websites and ideals it represents or provided the prototype for are being shredded and ripped apart in the grinder of commercialisation, corporation and the valuing of technology over humanity. Our attempts to provoke discussion, highlight the folly and foolishness of editors or simply to berate and irritate others being pulled down below the surface of lackadaisical karma whores, slashbots and other useless automata, grist for the propaganda mills of "Taco" and his crew. Only occasionally do the great (or simply repetitive) trolls rupture the calm, mildly bubbling surface of the Slashdot crew and cohorts' discussions. What was once orgiastic, vivacious, vibrant, active and edgy is now limp, lifeless, listless, passive and slack. All but a few ragtag, fleeting, fly-by-night trolling associations have been massacred or left for better pastures, and those which remain are collapsing and tumbling into the totality of disarray. To quote the low-cultural yet astonishingly accurate Sexual Asspussy, "TEH NEW AEG OF TROOLING HAS COME AND GONE". In a cruel twist of humour poignantly illustrating our shortsightedness, this selfproduced catastrophic failure has been predicted since 2002. We have the tools to resolve the situation, but lack the motivation, with those who can do something content to fight amongst themselves in ineffectual pigpens such as trolltalk or Geekizoid.

Old generations of provocateurs are falling into disrepair and fading out, with classic trolls dropping from the face of the World Wide Web for the cosmopolitan relic known as Usenet or, worse still, setting up unsuccessful websites which have always degenerated into mere talking shops, inconsequential, signifying nothing and running at deficit for a fleeting few moons before the inability to afford bandwidth runs, purges the last remnant from the consciousness of the mainstream. Ancient faithfuls such as Adequacy have been reduced to flitting HTTP errors, a ghostly echoing shadow and reminder of our own inability to fix this shambolic state of affairs.

The new are no better, incompetent, howling; they tend to be more bombastic but derivative and reiterative and so lose one's interest as opposed to the subtle classics. The gentle art of producing attractive and fragile yet incendiary comments has been lost and buried in a tidal flash flood of advertisements for nascent trolling groups, ASCII 'art', and other postprepostmodern neo-Dadaist detritus. The production of the "slashflood" script merely indicates that the mechanisation and industrialisation of trolling is draining the emotion and spirit of itself. Though the automation of trolling is a thoroughly understandable response against the face of the seemingly otherwise unsurmountable automated filters, barriers, sinks and guards of Slashcode, it has not proven to be a solution; not even a paltry one in one hundred stories is successfully crapflooded to the point of dozens of comments, and the reduced manularity of Perl scripts as opposed to the Ctrl-R/F5 key combo has given all of us an excuse to forget the craft of omnipollent inflammatory rhetoric.

This excuse has become so stubbornly entrenched in troll subculture that it may not be cleansed from the minds of some, but we must make an effort! Otherwise, we will cease to be able to post without fear of modbombing due to dull, obvious and tired material! Therefore, it is vital for the continued wellbeing of the profession of -1 Flamebaiters and +4 Insightfuls alike that we continue to push the envelope beyond all boundaries. I do not claim that this will be easy but it is above all most necessary. Plagiarised and constantly repeated material will not make the cut. The flooding scripts must be destroyed and creativity must once again pour from our bosoms, with spectacular visual imagery being painted upon the blank canvas of the comment box with our dexterous verbage! There is no doubt that we may be sorely tempted to fight fire with fire, code with code, and servers with servers, but an escalating arms race is not the answer! An action-reaction war of attrition has no casualties but ourselves! Only skilled oratorical loquacity and armies of wordsmiths can break the hardened hearts of our moderatorial oppressors who crush us, branding us "Overrated", to which we reply with seemingly perceptive posts, containing a veneer of respectfulness, crammed with Biblical, literary, musical and trolling references, a tasty nugget of misinformation, generally inciteful. The only successful route is shrewd and insidious, a corrupting influence which crawls through the undergrowth of -1, 0, 1, gradually creeping into full view with no one noticing, no one falling for what is, to an outside observer, an obvious joke, a planetary pun besmirching the name of stupidity. The fox will outwit the wolf.

Notice my usage of the phrase "armies of wordsmiths" in the previous paragraph. The implication of this statement is that one gifted speaker is not sufficient; since we are working towards a pre-industrial, pre-21st century ideal of manual trolling, we need hundreds of users posting one comment, as opposed to one user posting hundreds of comments. This is a major difference, requiring more effort, but more rewarding in the long term, rewarding innovation and not crushing it with mindless repetitious babble. A throughput of a mere dozen high quality trolls per story could smash the already flimsy yet flexible moderation system into a tailspin - fifteen such comments yo-yoing like a sine wave from +5 to -1 to +5 to -1 ten times over will act as tremendous sinkholes, black holes in the fabric of M1, sucking away the points of ten users each in the space of hours, eliminating first level moderators from consideration and worry.

This segues into the third prong of this multitined attack, namely, metamoderation. Metamoderation has no metametamoderation level to regulate itself and is completely anonymous and untraceable. It is also less likely to be revoked than standard moderation and presents itself as an opportunity up to three times a day for the luckier. By moderating all upwards moderations as "Fair" and all those which drag down anybody's karma as "Unfair" virtually all moderators will be weeded out, leaving only those who unconditionally, spastically mark all useless posts of hot air inexorably to the golden five to continue doing their valuable work and to overcome the grand but substanceless edifice of anti-troll conformist hype presented in the FAQ.

We can move forward. The right wing maniac, left wing maniac, and Joe Sixpack characters (amongst others) have served their purposes, but the time has come to retire them, build on them, endlessly textually recycle them to produce new candidates for the Perfect Troll. A testament to the idiocy of human reflexes, the ideal windup, the flawless debating topic, preying upon the simultaneous and diametrically opposing instincts to bash Microsoft acolytes and anti-Microsoft partisans, ignorant computer users and abrasive geeks. What is wrong with open source software? Why is gun control an idealistic liberal societal construct which fails? Who really did write the GNU/Linux/X/BSD system? The answers to these questions, and innumerably more, stretch through the darkest, innermost recesses of our writing minds. We can surpass our roots and ancestors, transcending the Cicero of past times, mashing, twisting, flexing words to our own ends. We must continue, take steps, and beat on, boats against the editorial current, borne out ceaselessly, into our paradise.


James A. A. Joyce (681634) | about 11 years ago | (#6495404)

You heard me. The parent post, "A Call For Action", is public domain material. No rights reserved. Forget the moderators and forget copyright law. Spread the word! We need creative trolls!

Good start, but not useful yet (4, Interesting)

lakeland (218447) | about 11 years ago | (#6495374)

Now I guess we get to find out how much KDE assumes X11. Because there aren't many QT only apps out there.

Re:Good start, but not useful yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495535)

Most of KDE is inherited classes from QT. So KDE does not rely on X that much, save 3d work.

Re:Good start, but not useful yet (1)

lakeland (218447) | about 11 years ago | (#6495565)

That was my point. KDE shoudn't need much X11, but no KDE programmer has written any KDE apps without X11. Have you ever tried to write portable code with only one machine to test it on? It isn't easy.

Re:Good start, but not useful yet (3, Informative)

ispeters (621097) | about 11 years ago | (#6495633)

There's also an implementation of GDK, or something. (I don't completely understand GDK vs. GTK.) Take a look at the GTK+ [] link on DirectFB's homepage. Apparently we can also run GNOME apps on DirectFB.


Before all the flamers get in. (5, Interesting)

mindstrm (20013) | about 11 years ago | (#6495375)

Consider this: What do you really NEED X for. Try to think bigger than unix for a minute.

Yes, X has remote display. That's a really useful and flexible feature in some situations, no doubt about it. And from a technical point of view, it's extremely elegant.
In reality, though, to a great many linux users, it's a neat trick that you don't necessairly NEED.

We use QT or whatever and try to design desktop systems (KDE, Gnome) which really just use X as a way to load up graphics primitives... those same systems could equally work on something else, with some great benefits in terms of speed.

From a GUI perspective, if you use all KDE apps, for instance, things have a very nice consistent feel to it. Same with gnome. When you start mixing things, plus mixing in old X apps, you just detract from an overall experience.. so let's come out with a fast, standard display system taht's NOT x.... and use X rootless for those legacy applications we need.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | about 11 years ago | (#6495389)

isn't motif/gtk built ontop of X? So just ditching X isn't that simple.


Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

mindstrm (20013) | about 11 years ago | (#6495400)

I'm not implying there is no work involved.. just that the functions X provides we don't necessarily need, and they could be had much faster with a more native less layered approach.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (5, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | about 11 years ago | (#6495414)

so first port motif, pango, gtk, etc... to DirectFB and then you can say "drop X, use DirectFB".

I mean its like saying "drop linux kernel, use QNX kernel" :-)


Re:Before all the flamers get in. (5, Insightful)

mindstrm (20013) | about 11 years ago | (#6495459)

I think you are missing the point.. we aren't saying "This is a drop in replacement for X" .. it's NOT X. I'm saying, to build desktop GUIs, we don't necessairily need to use X as a base.
Yes, that might mean that only apps written for that gui would work.. but that gui could be, say, QT (as the article is about) or something else.

See OSX for an example. Can I run X apps? Sure, if I fire up the X server. ANd they run just how you expect them to, they look the right way, and everything... but the apps that work really well use the native display library, not X.... and they work even better. And no, it's not because the X server sucks, in fact, the X server is quite good.

We are adding so much stuff on top of X we have to question if we really need what X provides, and if it can't be better provided better another way.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (2, Informative)

Jahf (21968) | about 11 years ago | (#6495572)

Ya know ... most people here "get it". It doesn't change the issue of applications. It is going to be harder to get the (li|u)n(u|i)x world to switch off of X than it is to get the Windows world to switch to Linux.

Switching from Windows to Linux still provides you with probably 95% application parity (MS Office -> OpenOffice, etc). Switching from X to DFB is probably going to be along the lines of 20% application parity.

It isn't that everyone loves X (although many do), it is that DFB is not currently a viable alternative for folks who need ready-made applications.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 11 years ago | (#6495678)


X11 Rocks! If you want a PS2, buy one from Sony...

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (2, Interesting)

goatboy_14 (527832) | about 11 years ago | (#6495513)

GTK has already been ported [] to DFB.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495393)


To elaborate, speak for your own fucking self. I use X remote over SSH every goddamned day, and I would be fucked if the free Unix world moved over to DirectFB.

The good news is that they're not going to do that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (4, Interesting)

Natalie's Hot Grits (241348) | about 11 years ago | (#6495472)

"The good news is that they're not going to do that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Well, considering one of the founders of the XFree86 Project (and board members) has said that the *nix desktop needs to be replaced by a direct rendered model with an X interface on top of it (exactly the same thing but with faster local rendering at the cost of nothing) I would like to call bluff on your "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Because according to (at least one) XFree86 founder, it is broke, and it does need to be fixed.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495523)

That XFree86 founder... is wrong.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (0, Offtopic)

Cranx (456394) | about 11 years ago | (#6495435)


Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

Tyreth (523822) | about 11 years ago | (#6495439)

I would not be happy to give up remote display. Not going to happen.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495465)

What about a remote directfb passthrough? As long as the proper instructions are sent to the remote end and interpreted correctly, it would be possible, right?

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495660)

You've basically described X11. Just add 20 years of legacy crap and outdated design assumptions.

All these X arguments are so boring, and all boil down to the same two false pretenses:
+ X Sucks because it allows remoting
+ X Rules because it allows remoting.

When in fact the remoting has little to do with X's suckiness, and the remoting basically sucks when compared with Citrix or something.

What's really needed is an X12 that has both good remoting and featureful local performance. But I'm not writing it, so whatever.

The best solution (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495486)

Plan 9's. The graphics, mouse and keyboard devices are standard devices that can be mounted from a remote filesystem; the advantage being the windowing system does not need to handle the network layer. And since each process has its own filesystem namespace, you have a bunch of different consoles and each program accesses its one at /dev/cons.

The entire system, including the default program that runs in the window the equivalent of xterm [Far89] with `cutting and pasting' between windows is well under 90 kilobytes of text on a Motorola 68020 processor, about half the size of the operating system kernel that supports it and a tenth the size of the X server [Sche86] without xterm.

The components of Plan 9 are connected by a common protocol based on the sharing of files. All resources in the network are implemented as file servers; programs that wish to access them connect to them over the network and communicate using ordinary file operations. An unusual aspect of Plan 9 is that the name space of a process, the set of files that can be accessed by name (for example by an open system call) is not global to all processes on a machine; distinct processes may have distinct name spaces. The system provides methods by which processes may change their name spaces, such as the ability to mount a service upon an existing directory, making the files of the service visible in the directory. (This is a different operation from its UNIX namesake.) Multiple services may be mounted upon the same directory, allowing the files from multiple services to be accessed in the same directory. Options to the mount system call control the order of searching for files in such a union directory.

8½ serves a set of files in the conventional directory /dev with names like cons, mouse, and screen. Clients of 8½ communicate with the window system by reading and writing these files. For example, a client program, such as a shell, can print text by writing its standard output, which is automatically connected to /dev/cons, or it may open and write that file explicitly. Unlike files served by a traditional file server, however, the instance of /dev/cons served in each window by 8½ is a distinct file; the per-process name spaces of Plan 9 allow 8½ to provide a unique /dev/cons to each client. This mechanism is best illustrated by the creation of a new 8½ client.
From here []

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (4, Insightful)

MbM (7065) | about 11 years ago | (#6495495)

When you do run a QT or GTK app over remote connection, the remote (server) library renders the widgets to x primitives which are then sent over to the local (client) computer to display.

Why is it that (to my knowedge) nobody has done this at a higher level? If the client already has a QT library why not simply send over a 'draw widget' command to that library, creating a proxy out of the server's library.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

sweede (563231) | about 11 years ago | (#6495631)

Windows Terminal services & Windows XP's Remote desktop does this. It is easy for Microsoft to implement this because you only have one widget set to use.

But, it would be very very cool if XDMCP sessions could automagicly figure this out.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (3, Interesting)

edwdig (47888) | about 11 years ago | (#6495663)

SGI's toolkit works like that. Next time you have access to an SGI, try running Jot remotely. Won't work unless you're on another SGI.

I guess the problem is figuring out whether or not the library is remotely present, and falling back gracefully if it isn't.

Re: Before all the flamers get in. (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 11 years ago | (#6495497)

> Yes, X has remote display. That's a really useful and flexible feature in some situations, no doubt about it. And from a technical point of view, it's extremely elegant. In reality, though, to a great many linux users, it's a neat trick that you don't necessairly NEED.

Sure, but what about the rest of us?

> From a GUI perspective, if you use all KDE apps, for instance, things have a very nice consistent feel to it. Same with gnome. When you start mixing things, plus mixing in old X apps, you just detract from an overall experience..

Which has jack-all to do with whether the desired consistent toolkit is based on X or not...

Re: Before all the flamers get in. (1) (450073) | about 11 years ago | (#6495551)

Sure, but what about the rest of us?

Ummm... You keep using what you need to use to do whatever it is you want to do?

What's so hard about that?

Re: Before all the flamers get in. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495646)

Because it'd split the development work? The way things are now, the desktop user and the remote user both get to benefit from the same code. With two separate and incompatible display methods, either app developers would have to do twice the work or one side is going to fall behind.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (4, Interesting)

EvilTwinSkippy (112490) | about 11 years ago | (#6495545)

Network transparency is a beautiful thing. I admit, my needs are a little exotic, but I happily run my computer from several dumb terminals (stripped down laptops).

Why maintain a stable of computers when you can have one ubermachine (and of course a few cruddy ones for DNS and webcaching.) The wife has a copy of Win4Lin for Quicken and Office. And I never have to worry about being booted off the "good" computer.

Hell, with my cable tuner in the big computer I can actually watch TV over the wireless. That is of course, if I had cable. I'm practicing living on Internet and DVD's alone. Apparently I missed something called "Reality TV."

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495671)

Why maintain a stable of computers when you can have one ubermachine (and of course a few cruddy ones for DNS and webcaching.)
Ever computed in the 70's? That is exactly what we had... One uber machine that was trying to time share/slice with several users.
Hmmm wtf have we been doing the past 30 years? We have now come full circle (from a mainframe server that serviced several clients to a networked environment that the service was handled locally; back to a(n) uber server that is now serving stuff that could probably be handled locally. Yes we had dumb terminals in the 70's but is the tech. now so evolved that we have to revert back?

We now have desktop machines that would make the circa 70's machines look like a calculator why would anyone want to go back 30-35 years.

Sorry for being an old-fart but been there done that and they didn't give me a fscking T-Shirt.

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 11 years ago | (#6495685)

Apparently I missed something called "Reality TV.

You missed nothing.

aparently the king flamer is already here.... you (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495555)

eat a bag of dicks.

Terminate the Terminal (2, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | about 11 years ago | (#6495582)

Well, there is the odd moment when it's a nuisance to not be able to run a remote X application. Like when you want to log into another system and run GVIM. But yeah, you're right, it's not worth keeping X around just for those rare circumstances, all of which have another solution.

It's worth remembering why X is a network-based system in the first place. The X server software we use now was originally meant to run only on a dedicated terminal. Some of these were actually manufactured (I think there might even be some still in production) but X Terminals were never cheap enough to compete with single-user computers for most applications. I suspect that the X architects just took it as a given that most computing would always be done on time-sharing systems [] . Hey, don't snear at them. That was about the time that Intel almost went under...

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

Arker (91948) | about 11 years ago | (#6495617)

From a GUI perspective, if you use all KDE apps, for instance, things have a very nice consistent feel to it. Same with gnome. When you start mixing things, plus mixing in old X apps, you just detract from an overall experience..

Umm here's an idea for you then... don't mix them! No one's forcing you to.

Instead you want to advocate a system where those of us that disagree can't mix them? Why is that?

Anyway, as you should realise but apparently don't, it won't work, because you can't force us to use it.

And you're completely off-topic anyway, this isn't about 'desktop' machines or workstations, it's about being able to build GUIs for embedded applications where you don't actually have the horsepower to run X.

X is a really great system. Not perfect, but no system is. It's a shame you don't appreciate it, but if you want something else, feel free to build it and use it.

X's poor performance is a myth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495640)

you are just perpetuating mindless FUD about X. since YOU are making these statements about a need to chage X for something utterly untested and undeployed, YOU need to provide the hard evidence that there is a need to change. where are the numbers?

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (1)

glwtta (532858) | about 11 years ago | (#6495688)

In reality, though, to a great many linux users, it's a neat trick that you don't necessairly NEED.

(glancing down at my taskbar with the 17 or so remote X sessions)
Yeah, you don't really need anything except food and shelter, but this is one thing I won't give up without hurting people.

(of course they are all on servers where there is no rush - or any reason at all - to replace X, so it's not really relevant to the discussion at hand)

Re:Before all the flamers get in. (2, Interesting)

dubious9 (580994) | about 11 years ago | (#6495690)

Yes, I'd much rather have alpha channel transparency than remote display. I assume DirectFB has an alpha channel because it is so prominant on their screenshoot, but is it really or is it the fake freeX86 transparency?

This is the only piece of "eye candy" that I miss from XP/2000 and I find that it is actually useful. And why after all this time hasn't X gotten an alpha channel? It seems like a lot of poeple would like this feature. Plus it makes using a terminal soooo much easier on the eyes.

err (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495376)

What's up with all the "Hot Babe" backgrounds? Makes all Open Source developers look like horny teenagers. Do you want a horny teenager writing your production Apache server??

Re:err (1)

E_elven (600520) | about 11 years ago | (#6495408)

They're doing a great job so far so I see no reason for change..

Re:err (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495422)

Look he's gay! :P

Re:err (2, Funny)

tds67 (670584) | about 11 years ago | (#6495431)

Do you want a horny teenager writing your production Apache server??

No, just my DeCSS software! []

Re:err (2, Insightful)

Doug Neal (195160) | about 11 years ago | (#6495482)

Do you want a horny teenager writing your production Apache server??

If he writes good code, sure, why not? Anyway, we're all human, and we're all sexual, in one way or another... what's the big deal?

Re:err (2, Funny)

Pflipp (130638) | about 11 years ago | (#6495493)

Long as the horny teenager is a "Hot Babe", I'd have no problem with that.

Re:err (3, Funny)

Arker (91948) | about 11 years ago | (#6495662)

Do you want a horny teenager writing your production Apache server??

Abso-freakin-lutely. I remember when I was a horny teenager dammit! Lots of energy, sharp mind, just the sort of person you need hacking code.

Plus, if he's off hacking my server, that means I have a window to hit on his hot horny teenager girlfriend. %^}

Wowsa! (5, Funny)

tds67 (670584) | about 11 years ago | (#6495380)

The screenshot looks HOT!!! And oh, yeah, the desktop looks okay, too...I guess...

Re:Wowsa! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495649)

hey it's my mom you insensitive cod

Don't think so.... (2, Insightful)

sdriver (126467) | about 11 years ago | (#6495381)

This is unlikly. The avarage X user (hell even the KDE fanactics) won't want to give up all the nice features of an X server. Who wants to use only QT applications? That cuts out most commerical software for linux, and most OSS.

This is most likely to help TrollTech in the embedded space.

Don't be betting on it either way... (5, Interesting)

Svartalf (2997) | about 11 years ago | (#6495406)

1) DirectFB supports GTK+ as well- I suspect Fltk's on the way as well.

2) You CAN have X apps under DirectFB with XDirectFB.

3) They're posting rather impressive framerates under Quake III:Arena with the DirectFBGL layer code.

4) Qt's ALREADY in the embedded space- QtEmbedded is what they're using on the Zaurus.

Re:Don't think so.... (4, Informative)

DreadSpoon (653424) | about 11 years ago | (#6495429)

DirectFB has a multi-application core, and also a specialized X server that runs on it. You can run GNOME on it already, adding Qt/KDE to the mix only _increases_ the number of apps that can be run on it natively.

And so far as the "features" of X... the only feature X has that DirectFB doesn't is network independence, which very few users need, and those who do can use VNC or the DirectFB X server.

Re:Don't think so.... (1)

quasi_steller (539538) | about 11 years ago | (#6495453)

If the widget libraries get ported over to DirectFB, who says that those who need X can't still use it? Why should everybody have to switch to DirectFB?

Sounds like a plan. (4, Interesting)

Meat Blaster (578650) | about 11 years ago | (#6495382)

While I've grown accustomed to X-Windows' ideosynchronities, I've always thought that it would be a good idea to reengineer the whole system from scratch to take advantage of today's hardware and UI concepts. X-Windows 4 has been a vast improvement, but I'm talking about something more like OS X where the whole thing is rewritten to be very smooth and responsive to user input.

If this is a step in that direction, and it sounds like it is, I'm all for a decent alternative that isn't slowed down by having to be a swiss army knife. Especially if it makes resolution switching, 3D graphics, and direct screen drawing less of a hassle.

Re:Sounds like a plan. (3, Informative)

aussersterne (212916) | about 11 years ago | (#6495415)

The X Window System is at version 11, release 6.6.

XFree86 is the one that's at version 4.0. Restrictions on smoothness and responsiveness to user input are due more to driver and kernel performance characteristics than issues with X itself.

Actually XFree86 = ver 4.3, not 4.0. (nt) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495477)

(no text)

Re:Sounds like a plan. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495420)

X-Windows 4? Perhaps you mean XFree86 4, you mindless imbecile?

All I know is that UT2k3, Quake II, Starcraft, etc. run just fine.

Oh, and did you just use OS X and "smooth and responsive" in the same fucking sentence? Christ.

Spend your reengineering tendencies on your dick.

Re:Sounds like a plan. (4, Funny)

Snoopy77 (229731) | about 11 years ago | (#6495462)

Yeah, I'm currently running X-Windows 4 on my Linux 9.0 box.

Re:Sounds like a plan. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495533)

a) There is no "X-Windows". From "man X"
The X Consortium requests that the following names be used
when referring to this software:

X Window System
X Version 11
X Window System, Version 11

b)There is no "Linux 9.0", you likely mean RedHat 9..

Re:Sounds like a plan. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495550)

(A) Get a clue.
(B) Get a sense of sarcasm.
(C) Get a life.

Re:Sounds like a plan. (5, Interesting)

warrior (15708) | about 11 years ago | (#6495575)

I've always thought that it would be a good idea to reengineer the whole system from scratch to take advantage of today's hardware and UI concepts.

Good idea, I've thought the same thing. I wrote a GUI toolkit for X, and a window manager, so I've got a good idea of how the whole thing works. I quit working on it as I was frustrated that I couldn't do some of the neat things I see in OS-X on X (that sounds funny, doesn't it?). Soooo...

I started from scratch writing an OpenGL based display server. I'm using a lot of ideas from X, but throwing out a lot of cruft and adding lots of enhancements. All of the drawing is double-buffered -- no more Expose events!!!! :) All of the drawing is also hardware accelerated. I've figured out a way to do this very well, without context switching the gfx hardware. One possible method will allow many clients to draw at once and keep a constant framerate (by not context switching/swapping buffers within a certain timeslice, these are very costly operations).

Some of the ideas I am keeping are the idea of "internalizing" graphics buffers to the server where they can be shared among other applications. I'm also keeping the idea of a replacable window-manager like shell.

For fonts I'm using Freetype. Standard image format is png. The display is also hardware-resolution independent and colordepth independent. Right now I'm being setback by the fact that I can't get X working on my new laptop (anyone know a modeline for WUXGA+ 1920x1200@60Hz, for Compaq X1000?). For communication I'm using named pipes/shared mem.

So far, my numbers are better than these [] .

I'd also like to implement creating server-side macros so a client can pass one command to the server and execute a whole set of drawing routines atomically. Oh, and the source is definately going to be open. Any of this sound like a good/bad idea?


Good. (-1, Troll)

Randolpho (628485) | about 11 years ago | (#6495396)

*nix needs a better windowing system than X. Not really looking so much as performing. X is bloated and buggy, IMO, so much so that I'd rather use Windows 95 over any X gui any day of the week.

And I hate Windows 95.

Now, I don't know how well this performs, as I've never used it, but I hope "damn well". :(

Re:Good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495534)

Your opinion is fucking wrong. X is not bloated and it is not buggy.

Fuck you and lick dick.

Background (3, Insightful)

quasi_steller (539538) | about 11 years ago | (#6495398)

Boy, with that girl in the background, I about forgot to look at the transparency effects!

On a more serious note: this is good. Not that I want X replaced or anything, but a little copetition is always good. (Besides, why can't there be X-Free distro's and DirectFB distro's?)

Re:Background (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495613)

not to be off topic, but you can get a similar background here []

In somewhat related news (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495402)

Re:In somewhat related news (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495507)

I think it's ugly and simplistic.

Re:In somewhat related news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495564)

Ok, now that we know what you think of Eugenia, what about Red Hat Severn?

directfb (3, Interesting)

Pflipp (130638) | about 11 years ago | (#6495411)

Maybe it's just the nature of the post, but I looked at the DirectFB screenshots (on, and I see everything from GNOME 2 to WindowMaker to the GIMP, translucency, etc., etc., while I've never heard of DirectFB before.

Great. Now let's see how I get this on my Debian... hmm... I guess it would take a whole other Debian "port".

Hey; it would be cool to combine Linux + DirectFB + GNUstep (+ "3rd party" Free SW) into a MacOSX wannabe distro. It's not a problem if that would still mean it's lacking more than half of the basic OSX functionality; it's the other, Free half that makes the thought interesting!

Re:directfb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495483)

Yeah! WhackOffX! I like it.. :)

Re:directfb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495675)

This rant by a newbie is interesting? Come on.

DirectFB has been in debian for as long as I can remember it being there. And also there is no need for a debian port, you just need to make a package.

Candy posts like that should not be encouraged with karma.

nice (1)

itzdandy (183397) | about 11 years ago | (#6495423)

one of my biggest issues with linux is that X is slow and bulky. You can compare it to any other major OS is terms of Memory footprint(which is bad) The Ability to run Qt and eventually all of KDE on DirectFB is great. Should also push other toolkits to this, or maybee to evas or something.

Re:nice (2, Insightful)

codepunk (167897) | about 11 years ago | (#6495541)

Well did you ever consider that some of us run over 150 desktop clients off of one server using nothing but X to get the job done. X might not be the fastest rendering display in the world but it is the most powerful.

Re:nice (2, Interesting)

DaBj (168491) | about 11 years ago | (#6495603)

Yes, and for running desktop clients off of one server X is excellent.
Running it as a local desktop it is, however, not that excellent.

So basicly, the same people who whine that Windows sucks, especially all the legacy code from the Windii of old are now whining when the *nix legacy code that is X is beeing replaced?
Did I miss something? I think it's a great idea.

Remote Display (1)

Apreche (239272) | about 11 years ago | (#6495449)

If I can get remote display and gtk I'll make a switch. But there's gotta be a distro that makes it easy, like Mandrake or something.

Mirror (5, Informative)

keesh (202812) | about 11 years ago | (#6495450)

Site is kinda slow... one [] , two [] , three [] , karma please?

Replacement of X (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495463)

I'd just like to point out that replacing X is pretty pointless, particular with a strictly less powerful infrastructure like DirectFB. Replacing XFree86 is another matter.

Please don't confuse X (a protocol specification) and XFree86 (an implementation of X).

Neil Peart is the Greatest Drummer Alive! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495467)

Neil Peart is an amazing drummer. He wields an unearthly drumming power like no other drummer on this planet. If you have time download The Rhythem Method by Neil Peart. If you already have and like what you hear, please mod this up. ---a----a--aaaaaa---aaaaaaaa--a----------aaaa---aa aaaaa-----a-----aaaa---aaaaaa
---a-a--a--a------------a-------a----------a---a-- a-----------a-a----a---a-----a--
---a--a-a--aaaaaa------a-------a----------aaaa---a aaaaa----a---a---aaaaa----a--
---a---aa--a------------a-------a----------a------ a---------aaaaaaa-a--a------a--
---a----a--aaaaaa---aaaaaaaa--aaaaaaaaa-a------aaa aaaa-a-------a-a---a-----a--

Re:Neil Peart is the Greatest Drummer Alive! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495557)

F)ffffff_________________k)________N)n___nn_______ __________l)L
F)_______________________k)________N)nn__nn_______ ___________l)
F)fffff__u)___UU__c)CCCC_k)__KK____N)_nn_nn_e)EEEE E_a)AAAA___l)
F)_______u)___UU_c)______k)KK______N)__nnnn_e)EEEE ___a)AAA___l)
F)_______u)___UU_c)______k)_KK_____N)___nnn_e)____ __a)___A___l)
F)________u)UUU___c)CCCC_k)__KK____N)____nn__e)EEE E__a)AAAA_l)LL


R)rrrrr__##_________h)________t)______##__________ __h)______##
R)____rr____________h)______t)tTTT________________ __h)
R)__rrr__i)__g)GGG__h)HHHH____t)______i)_n)NNNN___ __h)HHHH__i)__s)SSSS
R)_rr____i)_g)___GG_h)___HH___t)______i)_n)___NN__ __h)___HH_i)_s)SSSS
R)___rr__i)_g)___GG_h)___HH___t)______i)_n)___NN__ __h)___HH_i)______s)
R)____rr_i)__g)GGGG_h)___HH___t)T_____i)_n)___NN__ __h)___HH_i)_s)SSSS

_s)SSSS___t)___u)___UU_p)PPPP__i)__d)DDDD____a)AAA A___s)SSSS__s)SSSS
s)SSSS____t)___u)___UU_p)___PP_i)_d)___DD_____a)AA A__s)SSSS__s)SSSS
_____s)___t)___u)___UU_p)___PP_i)_d)___DD____a)___ A_______s)______s)_**
s)SSSS____t)T___u)UUU__p)PPPP__i)__d)DDDD_____a)AA AA_s)SSSS__s)SSSS__##

Re:Neil Peart is the Greatest Drummer Alive! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495604)

If you're gonna advertise music, spell Rhythm right. Thanks to you, Neil Peart fans are now seen as raving idiots worse than Linkin Park's.

Yay! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495468)

X-less MythTV, here I come.

DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (5, Insightful)

istartedi (132515) | about 11 years ago | (#6495480)

Not being familiar with it, the first thing I did was read the FAQ:

Q: Whenever I try to start a DirectFB application, I get the error message

Error opening /dev/tty0
A: You have to be root to run DirectFB apps. The main reason is that only root is allowed to change virtual terminals.

So. In order to get the supposed benefits of DFB, you have to run apps as root? I guess maybe you could log on as a user and su the DFB apps, but that's a pain. Why should a graphics lib muck up security? That seems inherently broken to me. If it really just abstracts graphics then there should be no problem with user apps running it.

This isn't really my area of expertise. Perhaps there's something I'm missing. Can anybody clue me in?

Re:DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | about 11 years ago | (#6495537)

Hmm wonder how X does it?

Re:DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (1)

debrain (29228) | about 11 years ago | (#6495612)

It's setuid/setgid root:

-rwsr-sr-x 1 root root 6988 2003-04-16 13:20 /usr/X11R6/bin/X

X goes a long way to preserving its integrity in spite of this. Presumably QT/DirectFB could provide similar priviledge separation.

Hope that helps.

Re:DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495625)

Hmm wonder how X does it?


~>ps u -C X
root 1261 19.3 4.5 173160 23220 ? R Jul20 365:26 [X]

By running as root, perhaps?

Re:DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (2, Informative)

stab (26928) | about 11 years ago | (#6495648)

In OpenBSD, Matthieu Herrb patched XFree86 to use privilege separation [] so that the main X process can drop root privileges and run as a normal _x11 user. The privileged portion just grants it the ability to open devices it needs and send certain signals.

There's no reason why these guys couldn't do the same if they care about security ... it's not hard, just requires the OS to support descriptor passing.

Re:DirectFB Inherently Insecure? (5, Informative)

RelentlessWeevilHowl (451367) | about 11 years ago | (#6495651)

Your X server also needs root access, and for much the same reasons. X needs to muck with the registers on your video card, for example. Nowadays, there's a little setuid program called "XWrapper" that gets access to everything it needs, then drops its privileges and loads the main X server on top of itself.

There is at least one project (KGI) that attempts to rationalize all this. It puts the privileged functionality in kernel space, then exposes it all in a safe manner. Linus has not been receptive to this design in the past, preferring the X mechanism.

Thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495484)

For putting the bimbo shot in the screen shots. Now I can be fired for sexual harrassment for viewing this at work!

sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495516)

What I'd like to see is GNUStep on DirectFB. There's no reason GNUStep on a 2 ghz PIII should run slower than NextStep on a 25mhz 68030.

Re:sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495561)

Hint: Not X's fault. GNUstep's fault.

slashdot grammar (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495520)

The first sentence of the article no verb.

Hee hee (1, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 11 years ago | (#6495526)

Ashcrow writes "The feasibility for DirectFB to replace XFree86 just a little stronger thanks Maurizio Monge very first alpha release of Trolltech's Qt library for use in DirectFB

drinkypoo says this comment very amusing thanks ashcrow very funny comment missing several important parts of speech.

Windows or holes in the walls? (5, Interesting)

Yaa 101 (664725) | about 11 years ago | (#6495527)

This reminds me of a long going project that was once called Berlin and is renamed Fresco along the way...
Though their ambitions were higher with making a new windowing system...

They still exsist at:

Re:Windows or holes in the walls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495579)

I think the Fresco team is too busy robbing sperm banks to do any actual fucking work. CORBA my ass.

DirectFB and non-english letters (1)

Bake (2609) | about 11 years ago | (#6495544)

Does anybody know how DirectFB handles key-input for languages other than US-english? Something like the stuff that gets configured with the "XkbLayout" and other similar options in the XF86Config file.
Does it use the keymap from the console, or is it just hardcoded to use US-english keyboard layouts?

FB Goodness? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6495614)

Alright, is it just me or do people only seem to use DirectFB for transparent GUIs?

But ... it's got ... (1)

SuperDuG (134989) | about 11 years ago | (#6495620)

Anna Falachi half naked in a wet T-Shirt, what's NOT To like??

Wait, looking closer ...

AND TETRIS!! Chicks and Tetris, what more do you need for a computer?

Though if I didn't know any better there might be a valid alternative to X real soon. All-in-all, looks good.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account