will freebsd15 get Wayland or x11 as default?

I

Ilovehotdog

will freebsd15 get Wayland or x11 as default?

i try Q4os6.1 with some issues of monitors and ibus-pinyin.(Wayland status)
when opensuse16, it be ok.(X11 status).（the same PC)

so, what's the choice of freebsd15 ?
 
FreeBSD is developed as a "base OS".

Admins additionally install anything he/she needs via pkg (package management system on FreeBSD and actual packages for it) or building via ports to customize from default. X11, Wayland, desktop envirinments / window managers / compositors running on X11 or Wayland belongs to it among others.

As FreeBSD is licensed under permissive BSD (3 or 2 clause, per source file, excluding some contributed softwares and ports) license, anyone can create their original "distribution" having GUI by default like GhostBSD, deriving from FreeBSD.

Anyone who are developing embedded devices like routers, firewalls and other IoTs would want and does splitting out unused (for the product to be developed) parts of FreeBSD.

Forcing excessive defaults could hurt derived projects like the examples above. So the maximum to be done would be preparing install time option to choose specific sets of GUI environment to be installed as bundled pkgs.
 
To make that a little clearer, FreeBSD's install is just a base system. GUI's are 3rd party stuff, so, after installation, you can choose to install either X or Wayland, using ports or packages. If you get more into FreeBSD, this will make a lot more sense to you.
GhostBSD, a desktop ready system, uses X at present, though I think there is some talk of including Wayland (not sure about that, just did a two minute web search, and it seemed to be in the category of "might, at some point".).

If you like Wayland, it's pretty easy to install and use these days. NapoleonWils0n has some threads on various window managers using it, as well as some youtube videos, if you feel like searching.
 
fmc000 said:
I guess you don't know how freebsd works. The answer is "neither". Or "both".
Click to expand...

Ofc correct, but with a historical caveat; XFree86 used to be part of FreeBSD aeons ago when both ports and packages were in their infancy. X was installed from installer just like any other system component such as compat libs.

I do not remember at what point, but I was already an user when X got moved out from the base distribution.
 
Since this "FreeBSD with GUI by default" question occurs here in one or the other way every couple of weeks it could be part of FAQs, or forum rules.
 
Zare said:
Ofc correct, but with a historical caveat; XFree86 used to be part of FreeBSD aeons ago when both ports and packages were in their infancy. X was installed from installer just like any other system component such as compat libs.

I do not remember at what point, but I was already an user when X got moved out from the base distribution.
Click to expand...
As far as I can recall (since 2.1.6-Release or 2.2.6-Release), X never a part of base, but sysinstall (prior installer of current bsdinstall) had option to install "packages" (not base "distribution" tarball) included in CD-ROM (at the era, softwares in ports tree were far, far less than currently are, so CD-ROM was almost sufficient) after base installation finished.
 
scottro said:
T-Aoki, yes I remember that, and I am also pretty sure some sort of X was included, probably twm.
Click to expand...
twm is/was the default (sample) window managar of X11.

And at the moment, graphics accelerator (not yet called as GPU!) support by genuine XFree86 was quite poor and proprietary Accelerated X was almost mandatory. If I recall correctly, even specifications of VESA video modes for framebuffers were still under developement.
 
T-Aoki said:
As far as I can recall (since 2.1.6-Release or 2.2.6-Release), X never a part of base, but sysinstall (prior installer of current bsdinstall) had option to install "packages" (not base "distribution" tarball) included in CD-ROM (at the era, softwares in ports tree were far, far less than currently are, so CD-ROM was almost sufficient) after base installation finished.
Click to expand...

Yes I was pedantic to avoid saying it was a part of base ;)

T-Aoki said:
twm is/was the default (sample) window managar of X11.

And at the moment, graphics accelerator (not yet called as GPU!) support by genuine XFree86 was quite poor and proprietary Accelerated X was almost mandatory. If I recall correctly, even specifications of VESA video modes for framebuffers were still under developement.
Click to expand...

I remember Matrox had their own X11 server. I think several other graphics vendors did too.
 
If I'm not mistaken, drm-kmod will no longer be a separate repository in FreeBSD "15-RELEASE". So, Wayland support is moving towards parity with X11and both should be equally viable. Architecturally, Wayland appears to have more potential than X11 across simplicity, security (e.g. app isolation), and efficiency, even if the various desktop implementations are still maturing.

As far as the "default", I think that depends more on one's chosen desktop environment than BSD. Some DEs, e.g. Sway (one of my favorites), only work with Wayland. Other DEs like KDE (and GNOME) are moving towards Wayland and away from X11, and those are the two major desktops. So there's your bellwether for "default". Wayland is absolutely the default for KDE and GNOME now, and as mentioned, some other DEs support Wayland only, so the concept of default for these doesn't even apply - it's not the default, it's the only. :) FreeBSD is not necessarily pushing Wayland, per se. Rather when the window system itself transitions to a particular technology and two major desktops favor support of it, one must go with the flow at that point. (GNOME binding to systemd a separate topic). So FreeBSD is simply embracing Wayland as an intelligent acceptance of reality.

May Find Interesting ( as I did :) ) ...

Another aspect that I have come to understand is that X11 and Wayland are not enemies. From all the X11Libre drama, one might think that they are.

X11 - Wayland is "X12" :-)
www.linux-magazine.com

Is Wayland the New X? » Linux Magazine

Display server expert Daniel Stone explains what is really happening with the future of graphical display protocols on Linux.
www.linux-magazine.com www.linux-magazine.com

Many X11 Engineers now work on Wayland:

gitlab.com

Commits · main · freedesktop-sdk / mirrors / freedesktop / wayland / wayland · GitLab

gitlab.freedesktop.org: wayland/wayland.git
gitlab.com gitlab.com

Matt Turner - X11, Wayland
Olivier Fourdan - XFCE Author
Simon Ser - Sway
...
...

So, ultimately, Wayland is an engineering decision by X11 and Wayland is the next "major version" of X11, as opposed to a competitor to X11. Also FreeBSD support is included in the Wayland repository, which is a great statement about the future of FreeBSD for desktop usage!

Just search for FreeBSD!
gitlab.com

freedesktop-sdk / mirrors / freedesktop / wayland / wayland · GitLab

gitlab.freedesktop.org: wayland/wayland.git
gitlab.com gitlab.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top