On Tue, August 20, 2013 08:06, Alan McKinnon wrote: > 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, jo...@antarean.org 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
Yes, saw it too. Window Switch seems to be what I need, except it doesn't work well with KDE-apps. (Guess which desktop I use...) I will simply keep looking and remember to start VNC whenever it seems likely I might need to continue at a later date. -- Joost
