On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:09:03AM -0800, Eddie Kohler wrote: > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >We already have the ability to pass multiple flags / options to the VNC > >driver as a post-fix to the host:port pair, so I'm not a fan of introducing > >a new option as a prefix. If using existing options syntax, it could look > >like: > > > > -vnc :5500,rev > > -vnc read.cs.ucla.edu:5500,rev > > This doesn't feel like an option to me, though; rather a different means of > connecting. Among other things, in "-vnc :0", the QEMU VNC server opens > port 5900. But the client's listening port for reverse connections > defaults to 5500. "-vnc :-400,rev" is clearly insane, but it seems strange > for an option like ",rev" to change the meaning of the port field.
Yes that is a valid point. It is a little unfortunate we switched to using display num instead of port num for the current VNC code. Having a syntax which makes people use negative display nums for reverse connections would suck. So reluctantly I think your original proposal may actually be better. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|