On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 23:33 -0800, Corbin Simpson wrote:
In theory, sure, but I don't think I've ever seen anybody actually
have any problems with this. In my experience the glyph cache is
actually too big sometimes; when doing 3D drivers, if I accidentally
clobber my cache, I need to go open
Hi,
Is remote execution of X clients away from the X server still regarded
as a design goal, or does everyone just develop for client applications
that only run on or close to the X server machine?
With a unicode text widget, every time a character is entered, the
line or paragraph(s) need to be
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 01:18:01 +1100
From: Russell Shaw rjs...@netspace.net.au
User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20091109)
Sender: xorg-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org
Is remote execution of X clients away from the X server still regarded
as a design goal, or does everyone just develop
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 01:18:01AM +1100, Russell Shaw wrote:
Is remote execution of X clients away from the X server still regarded
as a design goal, or does everyone just develop for client applications
that only run on or close to the X server machine?
With a unicode text widget, every
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 01:18 +1100, Russell Shaw wrote:
With a cursive font, all the cursive glyphs on a line could compress
when the line is close to full, but before the need for a linebreak.
I wasn't aware that there were any toolkits that were powerful enough to
do this, assuming you had an
Patrick O'Donnell wrote:
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 01:18:01 +1100
From: Russell Shaw rjs...@netspace.net.au
User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20091109)
Sender: xorg-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org
Is remote execution of X clients away from the X server still regarded
as a design
case, I am trying to view hundred page PDFs over a 980 to 1361
KB/second connection over a 802.11 wireless network. It is way too slow.
I guess a real alternative instead of remote X is to use network file
system and actually run the X client on my local X server.
I have not tried LBX but I
Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
I don't see lbxproxy listed in the X.org 7.4 release. But it is in 7.3.
What is its status?
Deprecated.
I found docs online about LBX, but most are very old.
xdpyinfo doesn't show any LBX extension for me (but I read online that
recent X servers include it by
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 01:31:50PM -0500, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
Any alternatives?
NBX
Maybe you mean NX?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NX_technology
Sorry, yes.
Joerg
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 12:13:47PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
I don't see lbxproxy listed in the X.org 7.4 release. But it is in 7.3.
What is its status?
It is dead.
Any alternatives?
NBX
Maybe you mean NX?
Jeremy == Jeremy C Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jeremy I am curious why SSH protocol 2 doesn't use the CompressionLevel?
The rough consensus was that the difference in bandwith savings vs cpu/
ram savings wasn't enough to bother with anything other than level 6.
They may also have been some
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 10:37:43AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Keith Jim's 2003 Usenix paper suggests ssh with compression beats LBX
in most cases:
http://keithp.com/~keithp/talks/usenix2003/
They lie, *especially* for slow links. However, NX is a vastly
superior alternative to
12 matches
Mail list logo
