> On Apr 16, 2019, at 05:24, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Right, but is that an inherent problem in RDP (e.g. being difficult to > implement), is FreeRDP library not good enough, or is it just the > Weston backend being not good enough?
It's a quite superficial judgement at this point. Only based on preliminary examination of the solution. I am not dismissing RDP, it's just not a smooth line to adoption right now with the difficulties I have had. > > I suspect the RDP-backend and/or FreeRDP have some assumptions or > deliberate omissions, which might cause problems. David? ... or extensions to the protocol which only freeRDP implement in their server and client codebase perhaps? > > If you introduce a new backend, can you at least believe yourself that > you would not knowingly leave omissions in the implementation that > would lead to similar problems in other circumstances? :-) Ha! You are correct. I've been doing this long enough for the rose glasses to fall off... So quite the opposite, I generally expect that everything that can snag, will. In the end though, all I am really paid for is adding remote screen capability in our product which is quite a subset of a proper generic VNC backend. The resulting work would not be upstreamable, but would still be of value in the open source domain for the next party to carry it forward. Like I said though, I am not there yet. I found it worth a lot of compromise to comply with standards and existing supported code ;) Cheers! _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
