Xephyr X server instead of Xnest?
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
Hi all,
I have a quick question, it relates to something I read in the description section of Software Updater and would love to have a better understanding of what it means and what to do about it.
From Software Updater - this is what I'm trying to decipher:
"Xnest is a nested X server that simply relays all its requests to another X server, where it runs as a client.
This means that it appears as another window in your current X session.
Xnest relies upon its parent X server for font services.
Use of the Xephyr X server instead of Xnest is recommended.
More information about X.Org can be found at:
This package is built from the X.org xserver module."
As it is recommended to use "Xephyr X server instead of Xnest", what would be the best way to go? Install Xephyr X server? If so, should this be done before updating, so Xnest would be removed?
Huge pre-thanks in advance for any help!
As it is recommended to use "Xephyr X server instead of Xnest", what would be the best way to go?
To do what? Notice that Wayland is slowly replacing X.
I thought I was asking a simple quick question, little did I know :)
To clarify, I've postponed the last update because I didn't know anything about Xnest or Xephyr (until now) and wondered how to proceed.
I am reading and re-reading all the replies... a lot of the information is well above my current pay grade, but very helpful and welcome nonetheless - there is a lot to learn! For simplicity, I think I'll just run the last update as is.
If you want to get rid of all the bloated things and go for complete minimalism then there is a fully libre GNU/Linux distribution already made for you - Hyperbola GNU/Linux.
Hyperbola uses Xenocara (from the OpenBSD project) instead of Xorg for the display server. It uses runit, a light and fast init manager, instead of systemd. It doesn't have NetworkManager - instead you manually bring the network up through terminal commands. It uses sndio (from OpenBSD) for sound instead of pulseaudio or pipewire. It doesn't have gvfs - instead you mount USB drives manually through terminal commands. It doesn't have dbus. It's an extremely minimal distribution - I have it on a laptop and I can boot it into different graphical window managers with each using less than 100MB of memory.
You can continue to chop away and replace the different parts of Trisquel one piece at a time. But if you just want to see where you will finally end up after replacing everything with its minimal alternative, then you might want to do yourself a favor and have a look at Hyperbola soon and see if it's workable for you.
What makes you think Xephyr is a minimal alternative to Xnest?
Simple. The definition of 'Zephyr', from which 'Xephyr' is obviously derived from, is:
1. The west wind.
2. A gentle breeze.
3. Any of various soft light fabrics, yarns, or garments, especially a lightweight, checked gingham fabric.
4. Something that is airy, insubstantial, or passing.[1]
So it's light, breezy, airy, insubstantial - in other words, minimal.
Don't ask me dumb questions trying to trip me up - I know a lot of stuff.
[1] thefreedictionary[dot]com
No need to fret about that, just go and chill for a while.
Thank you for the suggestion and information andyprough!
If you want to get rid of all the bloated things and go for complete minimalism then there is a fully libre GNU/Linux distribution already made for you - Hyperbola GNU/Linux.
The idea of a minimalist distro, as you described, sounds very appealing, specially if I install it on a second computer and keep my Trisquel installation intact. I think it could be good learning experience too (almost like having your cake and eating it).
By what you said, I guess there isn't a desktop environment and I would need terminal for most actions. Is that so? That could be hard to start with, but you made good points and I am definitely curious to discover more about Hyperbola now!
>"By what you said, I guess there isn't a desktop environment and I would need terminal for most actions. Is that so?"
The version of Hyperbola that I installed has the Lumina graphical desktop, and I think you can install the JWM window manager very easily. Both Lumina and JWM look and feel like typical desktop environments. And both are very minimal. So you definitely do not have to do everything only from the terminal. And Hyperbola has Libreoffice and a web browser and the normal graphical programs.
Its so helpful to have those details! Thank you very much andyprough!!!!!
Indeed. It is a good reminder that you should be ready to do much more command-line in a Hyperbola terminal, and spend a lot of time configuring your system, before anything starts working the way you are used to, as compared to Trisquel.
If you found that removing GVfs created a sorry mess, you should probably stick to Trisquel.
That said, if you do have time to explore and are willing to learn and research by yourself, Hyperbola is a great project.
My Trisquel is happy now and I intend to keep it smiling. Yes, I'm sticking to it.
I've also sorted the second drive I used for testing (now back with GVfs in place and working fine). The GVfs exercise created a good opportunity to make a good back up, so all is good!
You are right about making time to explore and learn. I am planning to do that, as much as I can, including making time to take risks, because some of my biggest mistakes have been good teachers, even if painful.
The description for the xserver-xephyr package says: "Xephyr is an X server that can be run inside another X server, much like Xnest. It is based on the kdrive X server, and as a result it supports newer extensions than Xnest, including render and composite."
So you will seemingly get the same, plus some more. So your choice should probably be based on whether you need "some more" or whether your current system meets your needs.
So your choice should probably be based on whether you need "some more" or whether your current system meets your needs.
Sounds good, thank you :)... so if I am happy and don't need more, I would go ahead and just update Xnest, as per last update (Software Updater).
That is correct.
Note that the description you quoted is about the Xnest package itself, not specifically about the last update. So you have all the time in the world to ponder about Xnest vs. Xephyr, if ever you wish to. The update is not going to tie your hand in any way.
Great to hear it prospero! Happy I can update now and let go, at least for a while.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires