Whats with X

[Deepak Saxena]

On May 02 2003, at 14:43, Rob Wultsch was caught saying:
> What is with it? Why is it that x is larger than a very minimal install 
> of 98 (windows lite)?

Well, what do you mean by "x"? Do you mean just the basic X server or
you mean X + all the KDE, Gnome, and other apps that go along with
having a full X setup working.

> Could x not be implented in the kernnel with a very basic vesa driver 
> (so that it will automaticly kinda work) and have the process of 
> changing drivers be nontrivial?

In theory, this is possible by using the framebuffer drivers and having
X talk to the frame buffer. That way the driver can change underneath
and X would not have to care.  I'm not sure if regular "X" can do this,
but there are windowing frameworks out there (specially in embedded space)
that talk directly to the framebuffer. I think X + DRI does kind of
the same thing, but I'm not super familiar with it.

> Could a distro not package two versions of the kernel one with x and one 
> without?

X is not part of the kernel. It's an application that runs on top
of the kernel, so the kernel has very little to do with the size of X.

~Deepak

-- 
In America, you are free to speak your mind as long as you agree
with the majority opinion.