Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #89055 > unrolled thread

Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 01:09 -0400
    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-26 07:22 +0000
      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 20:37 -0400
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:16 +0000
    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:00 +0000
      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:40 +0200
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:10 -0400
      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-26 21:24 +0000
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:02 +0000
          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 02:59 +0000
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:18 -0400
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Epherma <epherma@remort.app.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:31 -0700
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 04:35 +0000
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:37 +0100
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:45 -0400
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:10 +0000
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 19:52 +0000
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 15:17 +0000
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 16:22 +0100
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 11:51 -0400
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0000
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-29 08:25 -0400
                      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-29 08:04 -0700
                        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 16:09 +0100
                          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 20:33 +0100
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 23:35 +0000
                        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:08 +0200
                          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-29 10:32 -0700
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 20:10 +0200
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 18:46 +0000
                              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-29 12:32 -0700
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-29 18:47 +0000
                              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-29 23:41 -0400
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-29 22:54 +0200
                          Re: Not Much Linux Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-29 23:30 +0000
                        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 18:42 +0000
                          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-29 23:38 -0400
                            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-30 04:04 +0000
                      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 16:07 +0100
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
                Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread (was: Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:48 +0100
                  Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 17:19 +0100
                    Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:40 +0000
                      Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:22 +0000
                        Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 14:44 -0700
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 23:37 +0000
                        Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 21:47 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 00:24 +0000
                            Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 04:23 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 23:46 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:07 +0100
                            Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-29 01:50 +0000
                              Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-29 07:58 -0700
                              Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-29 18:11 +0000
                                Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:16 +0100
                                Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 19:21 +0000
                                  Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 21:54 +0200
                                    Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 23:43 +0000
                                  Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-29 21:36 +0000
                                    Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 23:51 +0000
                            Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-29 02:32 +0000
                        Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 17:57 -0400
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 00:03 +0000
                        Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:11 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:38 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:19 +0000
                          Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-29 08:19 -0400
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:11 +0000
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:46 +0000
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:47 +0000
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:45 -0400
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:03 +0000
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:35 +0100
          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:12 +0000
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:07 +0000
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:19 -0400
          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:08 +0000
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:19 -0400
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:30 +0000
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 15:07 +0200
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:48 +0000
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 01:02 +0000
                      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:10 +0100
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 00:01 -0400
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:19 +0100
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:37 +0200
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:43 +0000
          Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0200
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-27 23:07 +0000
            Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 00:10 -0400
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:20 +0000
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:40 +0000
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 23:00 -0400
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 09:37 +0100
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-29 18:24 +0000
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-28 10:48 +0200
                  Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 22:29 +0000
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 23:02 -0400
                    Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-29 08:36 +0200
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 22:57 -0400
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-28 10:24 +0200
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:24 +0100
                Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:22 +0000
              Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:16 +0000
      Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:51 +0000
        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2026-07-26 23:27 +0000
          Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:23 -0400
            Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
              Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:43 -0400
                Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:57 +0200
                  Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:06 +0100
                Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-28 15:22 +0000
                  Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:13 +0200
                    Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 18:17 +0100
                      Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 20:07 +0200
                        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:15 +0100
                        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 18:18 +0000
                        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-29 18:59 +0000
                          Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 21:59 +0200
                    Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 18:15 +0000
                      Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:20 +0100
                      Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 20:51 +0200
          Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 09:00 +0100
            Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:47 -0400
              Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:18 +0100
              Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:11 +0000
                Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 19:18 +0200
                  Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-29 18:23 +0000
                    Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-29 20:52 +0200
        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:10 +0000
        Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2026-07-27 15:45 +0200
          Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:16 +0000
          Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:24 +0100
            Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 19:55 +0200
              Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 09:59 +0100
                Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:59 +0200
                  Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:25 +0100
                    Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:07 +0000
                    Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 22:48 +0200
                  Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:00 +0000
      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 00:59 +0000
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:54 +0100
      Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:08 -0400
        Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200

Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

#89095 — Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread (was: Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late)

On 2026-07-27, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:31:31 -0700, Epherma wrote:
>
>> See also the suppression of Xlibre by huge corporate interests.
>
> I wonder how that works; does anybody come round to your house and
> tell you not to install XLibre? Do cryptic messages pop up on your TV
> or radio every time you think about installing XLibre? Do you find
> your downloads of XLibre mysteriously dropping out? Do you find,
> instead of an XLibre package on your machine, just a text file saying
> “don’t try this again -- or else”?

I think you're confusing manipulation by corporate interests with
dystopian science fiction.

You may have had a point there, but it seems to me you completely ruined
any chance of a serious argument with these exaggerated examples?

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89109 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> writes:
> On 2026-07-27, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:31:31 -0700, Epherma wrote:
>>> See also the suppression of Xlibre by huge corporate interests.
>>
>> I wonder how that works; does anybody come round to your house and
>> tell you not to install XLibre? Do cryptic messages pop up on your TV
>> or radio every time you think about installing XLibre? Do you find
>> your downloads of XLibre mysteriously dropping out? Do you find,
>> instead of an XLibre package on your machine, just a text file saying
>> “don’t try this again -- or else”?
>
> I think you're confusing manipulation by corporate interests with
> dystopian science fiction.
>
> You may have had a point there, but it seems to me you completely
> ruined any chance of a serious argument with these exaggerated
> examples?

I assume you mean “suppression of Xlibre by huge corporate interests” is
is exaggerated, since Lawrence’s response is so obviously sarcastic.

It seems to me that the reality is that it’s largely ignored. Partly
that’s due to of adoption of Wayland, perhaps, but it’s also
substantially because if you do need X11, Xorg remains readily
available.

  $ cat /etc/debian_version
  13.6
  $ dpkg -l xorg|tail -1
  ii  xorg           1:7.7+24+deb13u1 amd64        X.Org X Window System

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89111 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 17:19:10 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> 
> It seems to me that the reality is that it’s largely ignored. Partly
> that’s due to of adoption of Wayland, perhaps, but it’s also
> substantially because if you do need X11, Xorg remains readily
> available.
> 

Here is yet another lackey who fails to understand the software
that he uses.

Only comparatively few programs use X11 directly (my fave text
editor, cooledit, is an example.)  Most programs employ graphical
toolkits like GTK+ or Qt which then in turn will invoke X11.

Well, guess what.  IBM/RedHat controls the development of GTK+
and they will most like pull the plug on X11 compatibility in
the future.  Only Wayland (surprise, surprise) will be supported.

Well, so what?  All GTK+ software will still function as usual.
Yes, but that only applies to application software.  Other software,
such as the long legacy of X11 window managers, will all be broken.

Do you desire to use one of the excellent and still maintained
X11 window managers?  Tough luck, bozo.  You won't be able to do so.
Why not?  Because IBM/RedHat has said so.  That's why not.  There
is no other reason.


-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89121 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:40:48 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Well, guess what.  IBM/RedHat controls the development of GTK+
> and they will most like pull the plug on X11 compatibility in the
> future.
> Only Wayland (surprise, surprise) will be supported.

Who controls Qt?  I never liked Gtk but I've been playing with it lately. 
I still don't like it. Ridiculously long function names that all start 
with gtk_ are a pain in the ass.

It's ironic Gtk was developed because Qt wasn't 'free'. Be careful of what 
you wish for.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89122 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 27 Jul 2026 21:22:16 GMT
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> Who controls Qt?

Used to be Nokia; these days it's apparently some manner of alliance
between a publically-traded company and an open-source governing body,
both specifically dedicated to it. The company is Finnish; I dunno
about the org. Qt definitely seems less prone to infestation with Design
Divas than the competition, in my observation.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89133 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 14:44:10 -0700, John Ames wrote:

> On 27 Jul 2026 21:22:16 GMT rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> 
>> Who controls Qt?
> 
> Used to be Nokia; these days it's apparently some manner of alliance
> between a publically-traded company and an open-source governing body,
> both specifically dedicated to it. The company is Finnish; I dunno about
> the org. Qt definitely seems less prone to infestation with Design Divas
> than the competition, in my observation.

It started out as Trolltech. The trolls were great coders but their 
licensing was arcane. It was free for personal or open source use, but 
there was a license for commercial use. Unfortunately the commercial terms 
were so murky that it discouraged use. Like everything else it's been 
through changes of ownership. It was the commercial part that spurred the 
development of Gtk and GNOME. 

That seems to follow Qt. PyQt is developed by Riverbank Computing and has 
both GPL and commercial licensing. Nokia wanted to release it as LGPL but 
Riverbank refused so Nokia, and later the Qt Company developed their own 
Python bindings and released it as PySide under LGPL. 'Side' is supposedly 
Finnish for 'binding' but I think it really means 'Screw you, Riverbank!'

The two are very close but the official Python version is PySide6. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89123 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 27 Jul 2026 21:22:16 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> 
> Who controls Qt?  I never liked Gtk but I've been playing with it lately. 
> I still don't like it. Ridiculously long function names that all start 
> with gtk_ are a pain in the ass.
> 

Yes.  They have even hijacked all the standard C type names in favor
of their own.  Hence C "int" becomes "gtk_int" although they designate
the exact same thing.

Also, faithfully following the latest fashion trends, they eschew
the standard configuration files in favor of CSS markup.  Modifying
a simple font or color now requires a weeks-long odyssey of exploration. 



But it's not only GTK+ and Qt but also the plethora of other other
graphical toolkits, such as Xforms, Fltk, Motif, Tk, etc., that
will suffer with the enforced demise of X11.

With one fell stroke IBM/RedHat will have destroyed all alternatives
and forced everyone into its cattle pen.

But the lackeys on this NG won't ever notice.  All that they
can muster is the installation of Ubuntu/Mint and then play
their frivolous games.  They are not savvy USERS; they are tawdry
MOOCHERS.

GNU/Linux is for true *users*, i.e. people that study and modify
the FOSS software to suit their own needs.

In a few years, my predictions will have proved true, but the
morons on this NG will not have the mental capacity to ever notice.

Corporations love stupid sheep.


-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89129 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 27 Jul 2026 23:46:29 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> 
> I spent part of the last 25 years working with Motif. Even the legacy GUIs 
> on Windows used Motif with the NutCracker runtime and PTC X server. With 
> that much history the Motif code was completely entwined with XLib and Xt. 
> You're correct that the Gtk and Qt APIs sheltered you from getting down 
> and dirty with X11. The frontend replacement for the legacy GUIs was web 
> based Angular. No way could Motif be salvaged. What we did with placement, 
> app-defaults, IPC using XAtoms and so forth was exactly what the Wayland 
> people consider evil.
>

Both GTK+ and Qt can be built with, as of now, an optional Wayland
integration using libwayland.  Of course, X11 integration has been
the standard default for both.

However, LibreOffice, which can utilize either GTK+, Qt, or pure
X11 frontends, demands that GTK+ be built with Wayland integration
otherwise it will not run.  This is true even if LibreOffice
runs only within an X11 session.

The trend is obvious.  LibreOffice is another project that considers
only the dictates of the mainstream distros.  I have been told as
much when reporting issues on the LibreOffice forums.  Their developers
will not ever address fringe concerns.

But, getting back to graphical toolkits, I believe that Fltk also
allows Wayland integration but the other common toolkits, such as
Tk, Motif, and xforms do not and likely never will.

IBM/RedHat gets its money from servers and hence security is, to
them, of paramount importance.  Their Wayland product has been
designed from the ground up with security in mind.  Each program
can only run in isolation with no IPC.  This may be fine for
a public-facing server but it is a detriment to desktop workstations.

Thus, productive desktop workstations will suffer tremendously
just so those IBM/RedHat bastards can rake in more profit.





-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89139 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 00:24:58 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Both GTK+ and Qt can be built with, as of now, an optional Wayland
> integration using libwayland.  Of course, X11 integration has been the
> standard default for both.

I believe that is handled in GDK.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDK

pkg-config --libs gtk+-3.0

-lgtk-3 -lgdk-3 -lpangocairo-1.0 -lcairo-gobject -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 
-latk-1.0 -lpango-1.0 -lcairo -lharfbuzz -lgio-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 
-lglib-2.0 -lz


I get the same libs on Ubuntu 26.04 which is Wayland and MX 25.2 which is 
X11. /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gdk has both x11 and wayland subdirectories. I 
assume it gets sorted out there although I don't see any obvious #ifdef or 
other switch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89132 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 21:47:08 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> But it's not only GTK+ and Qt but also the plethora of other other
> graphical toolkits, such as Xforms, Fltk, Motif, Tk, etc., that will
> suffer with the enforced demise of X11.

I spent part of the last 25 years working with Motif. Even the legacy GUIs 
on Windows used Motif with the NutCracker runtime and PTC X server. With 
that much history the Motif code was completely entwined with XLib and Xt. 
You're correct that the Gtk and Qt APIs sheltered you from getting down 
and dirty with X11. The frontend replacement for the legacy GUIs was web 
based Angular. No way could Motif be salvaged. What we did with placement, 
app-defaults, IPC using XAtoms and so forth was exactly what the Wayland 
people consider evil.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89145 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 27/07/2026 22:47, Farley Flud wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2026 21:22:16 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Also, faithfully following the latest fashion trends, they eschew
> the standard configuration files in favor of CSS markup.  Modifying
> a simple font or color now requires a weeks-long odyssey of exploration.
> 

> 
> 
> But it's not only GTK+ and Qt but also the plethora of other other
> graphical toolkits, such as Xforms, Fltk, Motif, Tk, etc., that
> will suffer with the enforced demise of X11.
> 
Thank fuck for that.
90s cruft, all off it.
The fact that they all exist shows that X was never a solution by itself

> With one fell stroke IBM/RedHat will have destroyed all alternatives
> and forced everyone into its cattle pen.
> 
Yes. There will be nothing left to get religious about, will there?

> But the lackeys on this NG won't ever notice.  All that they
> can muster is the installation of Ubuntu/Mint and then play
> their frivolous games.  They are not savvy USERS; they are tawdry
> MOOCHERS.
And proud to be so.

> 
> GNU/Linux is for true *users*, i.e. people that study and modify
> the FOSS software to suit their own needs.
> 
Ah, the true zealot

> In a few years, my predictions will have proved true, but the
> morons on this NG will not have the mental capacity to ever notice.
> 
No, we will be dead.

> Corporations love stupid sheep.
> 
Twas ever thus..

> 

-- 
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89172 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 27/07/2026 22:47, Farley Flud wrote:
>> On 27 Jul 2026 21:22:16 GMT, rbowman wrote:
> 
>> Also, faithfully following the latest fashion trends, they eschew
>> the standard configuration files in favor of CSS markup.  Modifying
>> a simple font or color now requires a weeks-long odyssey of exploration.
>> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> But it's not only GTK+ and Qt but also the plethora of other other
>> graphical toolkits, such as Xforms, Fltk, Motif, Tk, etc., that
>> will suffer with the enforced demise of X11.
>> 
> Thank fuck for that.
> 90s cruft, all off it.
> The fact that they all exist shows that X was never a solution by itself

X (the low level wire protocol and xlib the library) was never meant to 
be a "solution by itself".  It supplies the underlying basic building 
blocks (windows, intersections between windows, event detection, etc) 
but leaves the task of converting that into a GUI to the code utilizing 
it.  Those alphabet soup of toolkits listed all provide various 
different abstractions over the raw X building blocks so the programmer 
can request that, e.g a button be placed on screen vs.  having to 
assemble a button from the underlying primitives.  A similar analogy is 
that you can "build a cake" from flour, sugar, eggs, flavorings, etc.  
or you can buy a ready made cake.  Raw X gives you the flour, sugar, 
eggs, flavorings, and it's up to you to mix them in the right 
proportion and then bake them for the right time.  Qt or Fltk or Tk let 
you "buy a ready made cake" instead.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89182 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 01:50:52 -0000 (UTC)
Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> X (the low level wire protocol and xlib the library) was never meant
> to be a "solution by itself".

That's both a blessing and a curse as it leads to a very tower-of-Babel
approach to UX in *nix software. The funny thing is that Wayland isn't
a "full solution" either, so it doesn't even have consistency to offer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89195 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 01:50:52 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> 
> X (the low level wire protocol and xlib the library) was never meant to 
> be a "solution by itself".  It supplies the underlying basic building 
> blocks (windows, intersections between windows, event detection, etc) 
> but leaves the task of converting that into a GUI to the code utilizing 
> it.  Those alphabet soup of toolkits listed all provide various 
> different abstractions over the raw X building blocks so the programmer 
> can request that, e.g a button be placed on screen vs.  having to 
> assemble a button from the underlying primitives.  A similar analogy is 
> that you can "build a cake" from flour, sugar, eggs, flavorings, etc.  
> or you can buy a ready made cake.  Raw X gives you the flour, sugar, 
> eggs, flavorings, and it's up to you to mix them in the right 
> proportion and then bake them for the right time.  Qt or Fltk or Tk let 
> you "buy a ready made cake" instead.
>

That is correct.

There are still some programs that invoke X11 directly.  One example
is my fave text editor/IDE cooledit:

<https://github.com/paulsheer/cooledit>

[~]# ldd /usr/local/bin/cooledit
        linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffff7fc7000)
        libCw.so.1 => /usr/local/lib64/libCw.so.1 (0x00007ffff7eaa000)
        libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libX11.so.6 (0x00007ffff7d67000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007ffff7b96000)
        libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so.6 (0x00007ffff7ac2000)
        libxcb.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libxcb.so.1 (0x00007ffff7a9a000)
        /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007ffff7fc9000)
        libz.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00007ffff7a7f000)
        libbz2.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libbz2.so.1 (0x00007ffff7a6c000)
        libpng16.so.16 => /usr/lib64/libpng16.so.16 (0x00007ffff7a1b000)
        libbrotlidec.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libbrotlidec.so.1 (0x00007ffff7a0d000)
        libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXau.so.6 (0x00007ffff7a09000)
        libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x00007ffff7a01000)
        libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00007ffff792b000)
        libbrotlicommon.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libbrotlicommon.so.1 (0x00007ffff7909000)


Unfortunately, the mainstream distros have all dropped cooledit
(it's probably not "modern" enough for their tastes).

It has to be built from source.




-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89198 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 29/07/2026 19:11, Farley Flud wrote:
> It has to be built from source.

So what are you doing here? go off and build some Linux 'from source', 
that you wrote...

-- 
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89210 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 18:11:22 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Unfortunately, the mainstream distros have all dropped cooledit (it's
> probably not "modern" enough for their tastes).

Well, except for the one edit it hasn't seen activity in 4 years. Not so 
much for applications but when I'm deciding if I will use libfoobar in a 
project I always check the activity.

https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat

I've been using expat almost as long as it's been around and they're still 
poking at it.  I've never encountered a bug but apparently there is always 
something to do, mostly security fixes lately. If I saw the hypothetical 
libfoobar hadn't been touched in 4 years I'd look for alternatives. True, 
maybe it is so good it hasn't needed work.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89213 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 2026-07-29 21:21, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 18:11:22 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
> 
>> Unfortunately, the mainstream distros have all dropped cooledit (it's
>> probably not "modern" enough for their tastes).
> 
> Well, except for the one edit it hasn't seen activity in 4 years. Not so
> much for applications but when I'm deciding if I will use libfoobar in a
> project I always check the activity.
> 
> https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat
> 
> I've been using expat almost as long as it's been around and they're still
> poking at it.  I've never encountered a bug but apparently there is always
> something to do, mostly security fixes lately. If I saw the hypothetical
> libfoobar hadn't been touched in 4 years I'd look for alternatives. True,
> maybe it is so good it hasn't needed work.

It does not have a wikipedia package. That's the first thing I check.

There is another project with the same name that is about audio.

Distros are about volunteering: if there is a volunteer that is 
interesting in building a package for a distro, it appears there. It is 
not about business.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89220 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:54:38 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> It does not have a wikipedia package. That's the first thing I check.
> 
> There is another project with the same name that is about audio.

Expat?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expat_(software)

'Cooledit' gets murky since most of the hits are for 'cool edit', the 
Adobe app that was renamed Audition. Quotes around "cooledit" don't help, 
nor do the websites about "Cool Edit" that misspell it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89216 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On 29 Jul 2026 19:21:36 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 18:11:22 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
> 
>> Unfortunately, the mainstream distros have all dropped cooledit (it's
>> probably not "modern" enough for their tastes).
> 
> Well, except for the one edit it hasn't seen activity in 4 years. Not so 
> much for applications but when I'm deciding if I will use libfoobar in a 
> project I always check the activity.
> 
> https://github.com/libexpat/libexpat
> 
> I've been using expat almost as long as it's been around and they're still 
> poking at it.  I've never encountered a bug but apparently there is always 
> something to do, mostly security fixes lately. If I saw the hypothetical 
> libfoobar hadn't been touched in 4 years I'd look for alternatives. True, 
> maybe it is so good it hasn't needed work.
>

If it ain't broke then don't fix it.

That tried-and-true aphorism is standard in every engineer's toolbox.

Software does not "age."  If it runs today then it will run forever.

The only problem is that the APIs of any dependencies may change
(although they should never do so).

For example, I use a 25-year-old program that calls routines in
libtiff.  That library was updated and the former API is no longer
valid.  But it's no problem.  Just build the former version of
libtiff and either link it directly or use the LD_LIBRARY_PATH
variable at run time.

However, if one is totally dependent on a distro then this may not
be so simple.

But whatever, software never "dies."  Every GNU project, including
the kernel, has source archives going back to the beginning.

Even GCC maintains source archives.  If a certain program fails
to build with the latest-and-greatest GCC there is no need to
howl and beg for an update.  Just revert to an earlier version
of GCC.



-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#89221 — Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:36:33 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> If it ain't broke then don't fix it.
> 
> That tried-and-true aphorism is standard in every engineer's toolbox.

I fully agree with that for the most part but I've gotten burned with 
libraries. Of course, I've gotten burned with projects that are very 
actively maintained too. OpenSSL 3.0 ain't OpenSSL 2.0, etc. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web