Do you still see interest in keeping X11 Applications in modern distributions?
Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
What is the interests in keeping them in most modern Linux distributions?
I believe that Ubuntu, Debian,... should remove the programs of "prehistoric" age in order to keep only modern packages.
Furthermore, since X11 will be soon replaced by Wayland, maybe it could be good to keep focus on packages that make larger audience and that can be directed to larger public.
Would you really need the X11 softwares/packages, that are mentioned above?
Super Mario Bros. 3 rocks but I play 1 more I can still fire up my floppy Lemmings too tho I moved it from floppy and the drives to the attic... freedom should allow for anything‽
My top three desktops right now when not CLI are KDE, Ratpoison and Window Maker.
Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-05-2017 at 05:57 AM.
Reason: semantics
No, no, no ... Unix/Linux is also about supporting its uncommonly-rich present and its past. The "GUIs" that you mention are only the tip of the iceberg of "graphical Unix/Linux applications." And, if you look closely, you will see that these windowing systems (XOrg, Wayland) champion backward compatibility with applications, even as they support more-current hardware.
Super Mario Bros. 3 rocks but I play 1 more I can still fire up my floppy Lemmings too tho I moved it from floppy and the drives to the attic... freedom should allow for anything‽
My top three desktops right now when not CLI are KDE, Ratpoison and Window Maker.
@Jam': I can#t believe that you haven't Devuan, without SysD.
Just use the ncgamemed for selecting your game.
You can tell the prg to play even PSX iso's.
You press : 'm' and 't' to configure the emu prg that you'd like to use.
No, no, no ... Unix/Linux is also about supporting its uncommonly-rich present and its past. The "GUIs" that you mention are only the tip of the iceberg of "graphical Unix/Linux applications." And, if you look closely, you will see that these windowing systems (XOrg, Wayland) champion backward compatibility with applications, even as they support more-current hardware.
Linux does no longer look like what it was 20 years ago, if you would like, you may look at the following link closer: http://tour.ubuntu.com/en/ Linux is a modern system, with all kind of softwares for everyone, and old X11 applications have no longer their place. Beautiful QT, KDE, GTK, GTK+... have largely replaced libx11-dev!
It is the time for a change to go for Wayland. Compatibility is not a big problem. User should adapt themself for modern systems. The task of Linux is not to keep old systems, but rather to work on today's systems/architectures. Why not old pc 486 architectures?
But X11, above apps, shall be somehow really kept into modern Linux distros? It is time for change concerning graphical Xorg system... no? After Xfree, maybe, Linux community could have designed a new graphical system, instead of making the X follow up.
Linux does no longer look like what it was 20 years ago, if you would like, you may look at the following link closer: http://tour.ubuntu.com/en/ Linux is a modern system, with all kind of softwares for everyone, and old X11 applications have no longer their place. Beautiful QT, KDE, GTK, GTK+... have largely replaced libx11-dev!
It is the time for a change to go for Wayland. Compatibility is not a big problem. User should adapt themself for modern systems. The task of Linux is not to keep old systems, but rather to work on today's systems/architectures. Why not old pc 486 architectures?
But X11, above apps, shall be somehow really kept into modern Linux distros? It is time for change concerning graphical Xorg system... no? After Xfree, maybe, Linux community could have designed a new graphical system, instead of making the X follow up.
Notice please your own assumption and/or contradiction. "Everyone" doesn't mean just like yours. It seems you have "drunk the KoolAid" that makes you believe that New ALWAYS == Improved, and don't get it that it is instead always a trade off and each individual must decide for himself if the "juice is worth the squeeze". Additionally what is your concern for these apps being a part of a distro? They don't use up anything but a little hard drive space and in any good distro you can choose to omit them. Seems to me a Tempest in a Teapot, of little or no import.
I agree that, while we do not want to have our backsides stuck in the past, we also should keep as many options still-open as possible for "all those countless applications" that have built-up over the many decades that Unix and now Linux have been in-service. This is a body of applications that is much larger, and much more diverse, than anything "poor Windows" has ever known.
Fortunately – we can do this. Because this is the world of Linux. We can control both ends of the bridge and cause it to continue to meet in the middle.
Binary backwards compatibility issues tend not to be because of old binaries, but because of modern binaries (modern binaries tend to do more complicated stuff). An example of an issue is when you upgrade a library and the application stops working.. Lower level code though tends not to have this problem, it's mostly UI code because the libraries are way more complicated and bigger so bugs occur more. Sometimes bugs go un-noticed for so long that it becomes a feature, and when someone fixes that bug it breaks something else (a potential inherent flaw of Linux?)
Last edited by justmy2cents; 06-05-2017 at 12:30 PM.
Binary backwards compatibility issues tend not to be because of old binaries, but because of modern binaries (modern binaries tend to do more complicated stuff). An example of an issue is when you upgrade a library and the application stops working.. Lower level code though tends not to have this problem, it's mostly UI code because the libraries are way more complicated and bigger so bugs occur more. Sometimes bugs go un-noticed for so long that it becomes a feature, and when someone fixes that bug it breaks something else (a potential inherent flaw of Linux?)
If Linux goes to Wayland, it will not be for having a less complicated library than previous X11 library. The Linux softwares have high library complexity, and this is why distributions are for.
If Linux goes to Wayland, it will not be for having a less complicated library than previous X11 library. The Linux softwares have high library complexity, and this is why distributions are for.
I was under the impression that the existence of many distributions was due to deep-seated disagreements over development methodology, or which flavor of ice cream is superior, or even what's/who's important..
I was under the impression that the existence of many distributions was due to deep-seated disagreements over development methodology, or which flavor of ice cream is superior, or even what's/who's important..
Thankfully, that is not(!) the case!
Linux has "become a business software environment," now, and it runs on over 20(!) very-distinct hardware platforms. Instead of there being "one proprietary corporation to [try to ...] rule them all," many different companies have carved-out their own particular niches, with different customer profiles that each one serves. The business proposition of each player is complementary to that of all the others. Different companies bring different blends of "value added" to their mix.
And ... they cooperate(!) quite closely, knowing that "a rising tide lifts all boats." These are ($)rich($) waters for any sensible fisherman . . .
Linux has "become a business software environment," now, and it runs on over 20(!) very-distinct hardware platforms. Instead of there being "one proprietary corporation to [try to ...] rule them all," many different companies have carved-out their own particular niches, with different customer profiles that each one serves. The business proposition of each player is complementary to that of all the others. Different companies bring different blends of "value added" to their mix.
And ... they cooperate(!) quite closely, knowing that "a rising tide lifts all boats." These are ($)rich($) waters for any sensible fisherman . . .
IDK with Ubuntu's LXD container/hyperviser that can run software that's only certified or supported on more established enterprise distros, such as RHEL or SLES on a Ubuntu server, they may be taking over..
Last edited by justmy2cents; 06-06-2017 at 12:03 PM.
Have you thrown away your pencil and paper because you have a text editor?
Keep as many tools in the toolbox (provided they still work) as you can, not just the newest, shiniest ones. I'm using xclock now and xfig is still up-to-date. Besides, what's a few kilobytes when most disks now are in the gigabyte or terrabyte range? Those old programs can be considered "finished", in that they don't need further work or updates. How many patches or updates does xeyes need? If I want to make a little illustration for a forum, xpaint is much more approachable than gimp. util-linux has been ripping out stuff too lately (looking at you, Karel Zak). Old things that are still around are around for a reason: they have withstood the test of time. X11, sendmail, etc.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.