Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932070AbWERMEK (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:04:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932078AbWERMEJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:04:09 -0400 Received: from embla.aitel.hist.no ([158.38.50.22]:41692 "HELO embla.aitel.hist.no") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932074AbWERMEH (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 May 2006 08:04:07 -0400 Message-ID: <446C61F8.7080406@aitel.hist.no> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:00:56 +0200 From: Helge Hafting User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux cbon CC: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: replacing X Window System ! References: <20060517123937.75295.qmail@web26605.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20060517123937.75295.qmail@web26605.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2379 Lines: 74 linux cbon wrote: > --- Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu a écrit : > > >>On Wed, 17 May 2006 13:47:22 +0200, linux cbon said: >> >>If it isn't backward compatible, people won't use >>it. X may suck, >>but it doesn't suck hard enough that people will >>abandon all their >>currently mostly-working software. >> >> > >If we have a new window system, shall all applications >be rewritten ? > > All graphical applications - sure. >My idea is that the kernel should include universal >graphical support. > > You contradict yourself here. You complained that X runs too many things as root, and is therefore unsafe. Now you want to move graphichs into the kernel??? Don't you know that the kernel is even more privileged than root, so anything running in the kernel is way more dangerous than a program running as the root user? Also note that windows runs its graphics in the kernel, and have exactly this problem. An error in the windows graphichs system can therefore crash the machine. X has a harder time crashing the machine because it is not in the kernel, but of course the root privilege is still somewhat dangerous as you mentioned. The real security fix would be to run X as a non-root user, except for a hw acceleration library that should be in a kernel driver. This can be done without changing the apps too - wether it is doable without performance loss is another issue. >And then we would NOT need ANY window system AT ALL. >We wouldnt have 2 os (kernel and X) at the same time >like now. >It would be faster, simpler, easier to manage etc. > Your solution does not mean "no window system at all" You still got one, except now it is in the kernel and therefore more dangerous. We do not have 2 os now, because X is _not_ an os. Please look up what an os _is_, and you'll see that. Also, please tell why this would be faster, simpler, or easier to manage. Stuff in the kernel is generally harder to manage than userspace stuff, and definitely not simpler. Kernel code lives with all sorts of requirements and limitations that an application programmer would hate to have to worry about. Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/