Wolfgang Draxinger wrote: > Which brings me to something I always wondered about: Why is there no X > pendant for screen (or I'm not aware of it)? I.e. some proxy X server, > opening an additional display passing through X transparently, keeping > record of prerequisite resources.
Because it's ridiculously difficult. > And make this proxy de-/attachable. > So far I emulated such using Xvnc, but that means no HW acceleration, > no indirect GLX and such things. Of course such a thing boils down to > implementing an almost fully featured X server, so if I were to > implement such a thing, I'd probably start of kdrive/Xephyr. It's actually harder than a fully-featured X server. A normal X server knows what hardware it's dealing with, and the hardware doesn't change while it's running. A proxy has to deal with the case where it disconnects from one server and connects to one with completely different parameters. -- Glynn Clements <gl...@gclements.plus.com> _______________________________________________ xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg Your subscription address: arch...@mail-archive.com