> At that point, you're schlepping lots of large graphics, right?
yep, with large amounts of data.
> Are you able to modify the source to Ultrascan?
sure, though I was hoping to find a simpler solution. :-) this may be
pretty simple for somebody with your experience, as for me, I don't dream
>
>Here's another way-off-the-wall idea: bootable CDs. (-:
Hey, I resemble that remark :)
Seth
btw, VNC uses zlib compression...
Franklin Hays wrote:
> > Which X toolkit(s) does it use?
>
> gtk+-1.2.8, hope this is what you are referring to.
I think (not sure) that gtk+ is a heavy user of imlib.
> very slow to initialize then performance is fairly good until opening up
> UltraScan, then it slows to a crawl again.
A
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Franklin Hays wrote:
> > It sounds like Franklin has a different problem than what VNC solves.
> > He wants to run a program on Linux that will display its results on a
> > DOSbox (I think). VNC will put a whole X desktop on his DOSbox, which
> > is different.
There are VNC
Hello Bob,
> May I ask:
certainly, just hope I can answer. :-)
>
> What kind of app is it? A realtime video editor has different
> performance requirements than a forms-based DBMS front
> end. (-:
computational program called Ultrascan used to do mathmatical analysis of
a
Franklin Hays wrote:
> I was able to get it setup today after playing with the port settings on
> the firewall, though it was noticeably slow.
May I ask:
What kind of app is it? A realtime video editor has different
performance requirements than a forms-based DBMS front
> > disadvantages
> > different from X, advantage include stateless
> > (disconnect/reconnect),
> > simple ports (5900+), full desktop, and free ($$ and GPL).
>
> It sounds like Franklin has a different problem than what VNC solves.
> He wants to run a program on Linux that will display its re
I mistakenly attributed:
> Bob Crandell wrote:
>
> > You look at VNC as another option?
But Seth said that, not Bob C. Sorry...
--
K
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.jogger-egg.com/
Bob Crandell wrote:
> You look at VNC as another option? VNC has benefits and
> disadvantages
> different from X, advantage include stateless
> (disconnect/reconnect),
> simple ports (5900+), full desktop, and free ($$ and GPL).
It sounds like Franklin has a different problem than what VNC so
Franklin Hays wrote:
> trying to secure a slackware 7.1/2.2.16 box that needs to act as an
> x-server. anyone know what ports need to be open to allow
> this? currently opened 5000-6000, 496XX (from netstat) and 177 but still
> blocking the server somehow (shows up on other machines when firewa
ok, thanks all for the input. will take a look at VNC. I was able to get
it working today by opening up a few other ports (though not sure which
one(s) in particular did the trick) and it IS slow.
appreciate the input,
/frank
I had to open 512 through our firewall when I was testing X at
home. The result of that test is:
1) It's really cool.
2) It's really, really slow.
3) Don't waste your time.
4) VNC is so much faster.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/30/2000 10:29:16 AM >>>
At 08:46 AM 08/30/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>tr
Speaking of portsdoes anyone know how to get rplay working?
In my case, the server has NO soundcard. I'd like to have it's sounds
available to x-clients.
Possibilities?
jk
--
-
James S. Kaplan KG7FU
Eugene Oregon USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu
At 08:46 AM 08/30/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>trying to secure a slackware 7.1/2.2.16 box that needs to act as an
>x-server. anyone know what ports need to be open to allow
>this? currently opened 5000-6000, 496XX (from netstat) and 177 but still
>blocking the server somehow (shows up on other mach
trying to secure a slackware 7.1/2.2.16 box that needs to act as an
x-server. anyone know what ports need to be open to allow
this? currently opened 5000-6000, 496XX (from netstat) and 177 but still
blocking the server somehow (shows up on other machines when firewall is
down and not when it is
15 matches
Mail list logo
