[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On 12-Dec-2000 Erik Steffl wrote: > > Manegold wrote: > >> > >> Alson van der Meulen wrote: > >> > > >> > > When it comes to controlling a Linux X display, I'm a little more > >> > > hazy. > >> > > > >> > > Near as I can figure, if you want to control a Linux box using > >> > > VNC, you > >> > > don't run your normal X server. Instead you run vncserver from a > >> > > non-X > >> > > environment. This starts the VNC server, but you don't see any GUI > >> > > locally. To see a local GUI, you then have to do some magic to get > >> > > your > >> > > window manager to run on the VNC server; this means that you're > >> > > not > >> > > running your accelerated X server, so you may see some speed > >> > > issues, > >> > > etc. Then from the second Linux (or Mac, or Windows) box, you run > >> > > the > >> > > VNC client and connect like in Example 2 above. > >> > > > >> > > In other words, as far as I can tell, you can't run your > >> > > super-duper > >> > > accelerated, hot-off-the-press, XFree86 server locally if you want > >> > > to > >> > > see the same desktop locally and via remote control. This is not > >> > > the > >> > > (semi-equivalent) case on Windows, but it seems to be the case on > >> > > Linux. > >> > > > >> > > I may very well misunderstand how the thing works, but this is the > >> > > conclusion I've come to after trying it three or four times over > >> > > the > >> > > past couple of years. > >> > how about xvncviewer connecting to localhost, from using the > >> > super-duper > >> > accelerated, hot-off-the-press, XFree86 server > >> > >> As I have come to understand, that will give you two desktops. One > >> under > >> the super-duper ... XFree86 Server and one via VNC (running in a > >> Window, > >> liken an application, on that said super-duper X-Server). > >> > >> Also you always get a whole Desktop (even if it's in a window), while > >> with X you get only the window for the respective application. That > >> seems to be preferrable, if you want to run 5 apps on 5 different > >> computers, since with VNC you would then have 5 Desktops on one screen > >> (one for each computer). > >> > >> >From what I learned off the web page of VNC (thanks for the link to > >> >to > >> poster!), I can't use VNC as a replacement for X (unless you get the > >> non-X vncviewer to work on the console), which would have been > >> interesting because of the footprint of X. Also it seems that VNC is > >> not > > > > well, vnc server IS X server (on unix machines). > > > > so you are not avoiding X, you are replacing one X server (+ the rest > > of X) by another one (you still need the rest of X like fonts, > > programs, > > utilities etc., whether you use the ones that come with xfree86 or some > > different one) > > > >> as efficient via Network as X, but I don't really understand why. > >> Maybe > >> someone can elaborate on that. > > > > it depends, some operation are more efficient some are less. > > basically > > vnc transfers bitmaps, X transfers 'commands' (very simplified). > > > > for example the moving of a window - if you have X window, the moving > > is done locally (by local X server), with vnc the moving is done in vnc > > server and is only displayed locally, which is of course slower (much > > more network traffic). > > I guess that's why vnc hasn't replaced the X window system yet.
in certain sense vnc IS X, just modified for certain purpose. the vnc server on unix machines is basically implementation of X server. > >> Making the X Desktop accessible / transferrable via VNC, as is > >> possible > >> with Windows, is not possible with UNIX/Linux. > > > > ??? > > > > windows have no X desktop. > > true. > > > > > if you mean that you can use vnc to view windows desktop but not to > > view your 'normal' linux X desktop, that's sort of true, it's not > > possible with 'straight' vnc, but I've just seen ITP on debian-devel > > for > > a program that does that (not sure how well it works). > > Yes that's what I meant. I would like to run my normal local display > system (X), but also have the option to kind of teleport my display to > some other computer that I happen to be at. When I'm done I want to be > able to return to my computer and find everything the way I left it when > I left the other computer. > vnc does that. As a display I still seem to > need X locally though, since the console vncviewer does not work with my > graphics card. I don't know if I would save much overhead as long as I'm > working with vnc locally compared with normal X. But starting X plus > windowmanager, vncserver (running another windowmanager and the apps on you can run X server and xvncviewer as only app in it, fullscreen, in that case you don't need window manager running twice. it's kinda pervert though:-) > that display), and also xvncviewer, is certainly quite a footprint. It > would do what I described above. if that's the case you want the program I forgot the name of that was just ITP'd, I think it's rfb or rvb or something like that. I guess you might try to find it and build it from sources. not sure if it's the same thing, I just found it on freshmeat.net: http://www.hexonet.de/software/x0rfbserver/ it looks like it does what you want, you can run 'normal' X and have the display accessible just as if it were vnc server... erik
