| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Please, X11R7, not X12Please, X11R7, not X12Posted Aug 5, 2004 16:15 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888)In reply to: X at OLS by MathFox Parent article: X at OLS As somebody who lived through the X10 --> X11 transition, let me voice my support of an R7 rather than an X12. There is still some X10 compatibility code around (see X10.h) and programs that use it -- although many more X10 programs just broke so badly they were completely rewritten. (The original "xtrek" comes to mind as one open example.) I'm not saying we won't (eventually) need an X12, but that implies major changes to the API. (It could use it -- and I wouldn't mind seeing some high level implementations (C++, etc) that go directly to the protocol rather than through Xlib's semi object-oriented C API.) But there's too much legacy code and legacy hardware out there to completely drop support for it anytime soon. I like that I can use an ancient Sun IPC, an old 486 with a cheapo 2MB SVGA card, or dirt cheap used Pentium laptops as X terminals. I've got no objection to eye candy per se, I do object to needing a graphic card designed for high-end games just so I can open a few xterm windows and a browser ;-)
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||