Roland wrote:
> I see now problem changing server, viewer or protocol. Welcome to
> OpenSource :)
>
> Shure, we should not break existing functionality - but if we add
> "enhancements" as an option ? :)
The first thing the server and viewer do is to agree on the protocol version,
so it's certainly possible to add extensions without breaking existing
programs. If the RealVNC staff don't like your ideas you can always start
your own branch. There seems to be a lot of those already. Welcome to Open
Source! :-D
Ah yes, you said you are a bad programmer. That could be a problem...
> > Another way would be to split the server in two halves - the RFB server
> > end and the X server end - and let them communicate in some way,
> > probably by shared memory.
>
> mhhh - can`t follow very well here - what is the advantage of doing so?
> just compatibility purpose?
Compatibility and the VNC philosophy of having the complexity in the server
and keeping the clients very simple. And it should be faster than the proxy
approach.
> this would add another communication layer, and this will make
> things more complicated and slow things down, IMHO.
Yes, it's more complicated that way, but shared memory should be fast and I
don't think the slowdown would be noticeable.
I think I like the method with an enhanced protocol better though.
Bjvrn Persson
("Bjvrn", eh? Hmmpf! I think a certain list server needs to get its MIME
support fixed.)
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
