<quote who="Craig O'Shannessy"/>
> Yes, it works better on the remote machine, but the server (local machine)
> still suffers from lag as all X traffic still goes via Xvnc. Unlike the
> Windows version, even at the local machine, you still have to run
> vncviewer :(
> My problem isn't actually when I'm running remotely, TightVNC works well
> for this, my problem is I dislike the feel of running VNC *all* the time
> (even locally). It's annoying that it works so well under windows.
>
> I would have thought this kind of thing would have suited the X
> architecture better than windows.
So... You're running xvncserver, and a normal X server, and then you're
running xvncviewer to connect to the xvncserver?
DUDE!
You need either x0rfb or 'KDE Desktop Sharing', which is based on the same
code. There's a fairly desktop agnostic GNOME one coming soon too (the KDE
is somewhat tied to KDE, but it's way cool and nicely integrated). These
share your normal X server via rfb (the VNC protocol).
- Jeff
--
Money can't buy me grok.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
