> It'll be challenging to even figure out which one of the things connecting to $DISPLAY is the real window manager.
I suspect it would be less challenging than writing a whole new wayland server.
Off the top of my head, I'd use a separate abstract domain socket for the window manager including some UUID, and then pass that to the window manager when launching it.
You could create these sockets on demand - one for each security context. On linux typically a different security contexts will either have different UIDs - in which case filesystem permissions would be sufficient - or they have different mount namespaces - in which case you make different sockets visible in different namespaces.
For SSH forwarding you could have SSH ask the X server for a new socket for forwarding purposes - so remote clients can't snoop on local clients.
> Good luck on your lonely[1] journey!
>
> [1]: The people who actually developed Xorg are now working on various Wayland-related things.
This is what I mean by a failure of technical leadership.
I suspect it would be less challenging than writing a whole new wayland server.
Off the top of my head, I'd use a separate abstract domain socket for the window manager including some UUID, and then pass that to the window manager when launching it.
You could create these sockets on demand - one for each security context. On linux typically a different security contexts will either have different UIDs - in which case filesystem permissions would be sufficient - or they have different mount namespaces - in which case you make different sockets visible in different namespaces.
For SSH forwarding you could have SSH ask the X server for a new socket for forwarding purposes - so remote clients can't snoop on local clients.
> Good luck on your lonely[1] journey! > > [1]: The people who actually developed Xorg are now working on various Wayland-related things.
This is what I mean by a failure of technical leadership.