What I still don't understand is why TigerVNC and RealVNC need this
mechanism and why TightVNC and TurboVNC don't. What is the old code
base doing differently? Turbo and Tight 1.3.x certainly do not use
XDamage, because they don't even provide that extension. Both code
bases appear to be hooking into the same GC operations in virtually the
same way, and algorithmically doing the same things to trigger an update
in response to an X operation. Thus, what I would expect is that, when
disabling the ComparingUpdateTracker in TigerVNC, I should get the same
behavior as TurboVNC, but I don't. I get duplication of data.
I agree, this is strange. Are you testing with the same version of the
Xserver etc? Are all/most GC hook operations called twice, or just some of
them?
Rgds,
---
Peter Åstrand ThinLinc Chief Developer
Cendio AB http://www.cendio.com
Wallenbergs gata 4
583 30 Linköping Phone: +46-13-21 46 00
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model
configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and
the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free
download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Tigervnc-devel mailing list
Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
