Re: Xephyr instead of Xnest

[Aivils S. <ai...@un...>]

On Otrdiena, 29. Novembris 2005 19:32, Michael Pardee wrote:
> > Having mouse and keyboards specified makes Xephyr as good as
> > multiXnest for us, but once again we want to move to Xephyr for the
> > future.
>
> Xephyr does have other advantages over Xnest - server side support for
> modern X extensions like XRender, XRandr, XDamage etc.
>
> > What kind of work (or costs) would be involved to:
> > 1. use the xv extension for video overlays
> > 2. handle the keyboard leds properly
> > 3. use nvidia 3d hardware excelleration
>
> (1) I think would be possible and *maybe* not that hard. Would need more
> investigation.
> (2) Could very likely be fairly trivial with the above evdev additions.
> (3) This is probably extremely difficult and maybe not even possible at
> all. Though that said vmware can do direct3d accel via h/w afaik on
> Linux so there is likely a way. Needs much more thought though. You are
> likely looking at months rather than weeks of work here.
>
> > If those tasks are just about impossible in the next year, moving to
> > Xephyr doesn't help all that much, except maybe Xephyr is faster than
> > xnest.
>
> Depending on the underlying card and X operation Xephyr likely does out
> perform Xnest though I've never ran any figures on this.

	In my opinition in far future better is having pointer and keyboard for
each X screen. X server screen as separate workstation from view point
of end user already solve all troubles notified above. Most of X device
drivers support xv, OpenGL hardware acceleration for each screen.
	One trouble left - X authentification.

	In case when xv or 3d hardware accelleration goes via another X emulator
Xnest or Xephyr , then it becames slower. Anybody cant test it with
windows games via Wine or WineX, where emulator calls host openGL only.
Under vmware DirectX hardware accelleration is like programmers toy
but not a practical value.

Aivils