On 20/08/2013 07:38, J. Roeleveld wrote: > On Mon, August 19, 2013 22:51, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> On 19/08/2013 22:32, [email protected] wrote: >>>> X11, well that's another story and probably way off topic. It was >>>>> designed for hardware and architectures that haven't existed for 20+ >>>>> years. Almost all factors that made X11 awesome in the 80s and 90s >>>>> simply are not there anymore. >>> X11 was still really awesome in 2002. When we used remote graphical >>> logons to different machines. >>> It also helped with performance of certain desktop applications. Running >>> the application on a different machine (with better CPU) then the >>> machine I was working at always made people wonder why the same >>> application was performing so badly on theirs ;) >>> >>> But these days. Having fast reliable performance locally is better. With >>> a decent RDP that can connect to an existing desktop without having to >>> set it up as shared from the beginning is more useful. Any ideas on >>> that? >> >> Agreed. I've gotten so used to all that local *GL* goodness that running >> almost any app (except maybe xterm) remotely is just so painful it makes >> me cry... > > For remote access, I can live without all the special effects. > >> I'm also lucky in that when I managed to foist all the oracle with java >> installers off onto some other team of luckless suckers, I was left with >> just the best remote interface ever - ssh and bash. So I can afford to >> be smug :-) > > ssh -Y <host> works really well for those. > I always feel smug when others first need to figure out how to get a > remote-X connection to the server because they use MS Windows. > They often claim that a VNC-server is a valid pre-req... > Take it from me, that is NOT a requirement to install the software. > >> I don't know how to make your RDP problem easier - I treat that the same >> as allow/deny rules for ssh (or any other kind of access really) and >> just accept that sometimes I need to ask first for something to be >> allowed. again, I can afford to be smug here too as the only things I >> need to RDP to are terminals set up for that very purpose and VirtualBox >> VMs (that is one more check box at the create stage). > > For me the usage case is as follows: > 1) I start to do something on my desktop at home > 2) I go to the office or customer site > 3) I need to continue/finish what I was doing (it's usually for a customer > in that case) > ... > > At this point, I can't continue. Unless I remembered to run a VNC server > and used vnc to localhost for step 1. > > With a MS Windows desktop, it is usually (sometimes I get a "clean" > desktop and still can't continue) possible. > > One option would be to be able to redirect an application to a different > X-server and when that one dies/disconnects/... it will reconnect to the > initial (my desktop) one. > This is also not something I found yet either.
I don't think you can do that, I've never seen a way to change DISPLAY for an X-client on the fly. What you are describing sounds a lot like screen for X11, no? A thread last week was about remote desktop apps and what folks use. I didn't pay much attention, but ISTR a mention in that thread of something like that > For these activities, all the latest *GL* goodies are not necessary and I > can easily live without them. Remote 3D gaming isn't something I want to > do. > > -- > Joost > > -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
