Hi Darren, This was Russell's request, I quote:
|It seems RealVNC does not include |Xvnc server source; it ships a patch against an old XFree86. So in order to |build RealVNC's Xvnc, our build servers would have to go and get an XFree86 |source and patch it. Or, we could try to find one that works and include |that in our source distro. |TightVNC, on the other hand, includes an old XFree86 server-only source tree |that compiles nicely into an Xvnc server. |We're going with RealVNC for the viewer because it has some features we |consider to be essential (namely auto-resize and working full-screen). I'd |also like to ship a vncserver for completeness and for the power users out |there who will look for it as a companion to vncviewer. Laca On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 14:58 +0100, Darren Kenny wrote: > Hi Laca, > > How come we're using TightVNC for the Server, and RealVNC for the client? > Could > we not use the same (Most likely TightVNC) for both? > > Just curious really, but AFAIK TightVNC has some options that are only > supported > if both the client and server are the Tight version, but I could be wrong. > > Thanks, > > Darren. > > Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > > Attached are 2 spec files: > > - SUNWvncserver includes the server bits from tightvnc > > - SUNWvncviewer includes the viewer bits from realvnc > > > > As requested by the Xen team. > > > > Laca > > > >
