On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 06:45:09AM +, stxetx wrote:
> rio is available directly as part of plan9port for *nix.[0] Install it
This is good, but isn't helpful because it uses X.
When I talk about the goodness of rio I'm talking about the way it internally
works, that isn't as a normal window ma
On 26/11/14 21:57, Henrique Lengler wrote:
> Reviving this old thread:
>
> This is the only thread I found talking about have something like rio on Linux
>
> After read Rob Pike documents about rio, and window systems in general, I got
> very interested in it.
> He talks about how window systems
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 09:57:12PM +, Henrique Lengler wrote:
> Reviving this old thread:
>
> This is the only thread I found talking about have something like rio on Linux
>
> After read Rob Pike documents about rio, and window systems in general, I got
> very interested in it.
> He talks ab
Reviving this old thread:
This is the only thread I found talking about have something like rio on Linux
After read Rob Pike documents about rio, and window systems in general, I got
very interested in it.
He talks about how window systems can be less complicated, and he describe a
very interesti
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Sam Watkins wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 09:25:04AM +0200, Jens Nyberg wrote:
>> I have never tried rio but if I were to design one today I would have a
>> simple synthetic filesystem that for each window multiplexes the
>> framebuffer which is basically how ri
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 09:25:04AM +0200, Jens Nyberg wrote:
> I have never tried rio but if I were to design one today I would have a
> simple synthetic filesystem that for each window multiplexes the
> framebuffer which is basically how rio works I assume. For maximum
> performance each instance
I have never tried rio but if I were to design one today I would have a
simple synthetic filesystem that for each window multiplexes the
framebuffer which is basically how rio works I assume. For maximum
performance each instance would write its content directly to the
framebuffer in a linear fashi
there are libraries that draw to the framebuffer, opengl, svgalib, libsdl.
at one point i contemplated writting one with svgalib, it was short lived.
go nutz on them.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Sam Watkins wrote:
>> The problem is the complexity of writing a replacement and all the
>> comp
> The problem is the complexity of writing a replacement and all the
> compatibility layers needed to make it usable in the productive world.
The "window to a framebuffer" thing appeals to me because it would be simple,
performant, easy to implement, easy to code for, easy to port libs and
apps to
Greetings.
On Thu, 02 May 2013 06:06:33 +0200 Sam Watkins wrote:
> Is it unacceptable to dis X11 here? Although we may have to live with it
I don’t get how what was said and the topic can be used to come up with
such an implication.
> and write code for it, X11 is very far from suckless.
The
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:21:32AM +0200, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
> For now all the monkeys are jumping on the wayland train.
I don't much like the smell of wayland, although it might be simpler /
better than X11.
Is it unacceptable to dis X11 here? Although we may have to live with it
and
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 05:43:30PM +0200, KarlOskar Rik?s wrote:
> By replying to his comment you make yourself not just an idiot in his eyes.
By mocking me and/or calling me an idiot, without offering any relevant
comment on my topic, you disgrace yourself exceedingly in my eyes!
but whatever, wh
By replying to his comment you make yourself not just an idiot in his eyes.
On May 1, 2013 3:42 PM, "Sam Watkins" wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 10:43:06AM +0200, hiro wrote:
> > You could try
> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/03/how-to-easily-skin-ubuntus-unity-desktop/first?
>
> I'm guessing
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 10:43:06AM +0200, hiro wrote:
> You could try
> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/03/how-to-easily-skin-ubuntus-unity-desktop/
> first?
I'm guessing that you are mocking my idiocy? (in your eyes)
On 2013-05-01, at 07:30, Sam Watkins wrote:
> I don't love X11, and I'm wondering if anyone has ported or made anything
> in the sprit of rio / 9wm to run on top of Linux framebuffer.
Port drawterm to run on fb rather than x11? Then you can run the actual plan 9
desktop by
connecting to a 9vx pr
Do I get this right, you want to port a plan9 GUI to linux framebuffer
for performance and low security? And then you want a potential X
compatibility layer on top of it? And you want to trust your
applications more? Do you think they feel bad if you don't trust them
enough?
You could try
http://
Greetings.
On Wed, 01 May 2013 09:21:32 +0200 Sam Watkins wrote:
> I don't love X11, and I'm wondering if anyone has ported or made anything
> in the sprit of rio / 9wm to run on top of Linux framebuffer. I realise
> rio relies on Plan 9 dynamic namespaces and such, but we might be able to
> do
I don't love X11, and I'm wondering if anyone has ported or made anything
in the sprit of rio / 9wm to run on top of Linux framebuffer. I realise
rio relies on Plan 9 dynamic namespaces and such, but we might be able to
do something similar on Linux.
Would this be worthwhile, or not?
I know few
18 matches
Mail list logo
