Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
Hi, my experience is that X11 over ssh performs well for 2D in a 100 Mbit LAN Network. If you have a WAN between X Server and X Client you get much more latency, so that this is noticable to a normal user. If you do this only for remote support even a fast WAN (2 MBit) link is with waiting time usesable. If you access a remote machine on a regular base outside the LAN, you have the choice: open source solutions VNC and FreeNX or closed source solution (Sun Global Desktop / Citrix ...). If you need a easy to install solution then use VNC. It works nearly out of the box (even if twm is not everbodys first choice) VNC can deal with ssh Portforwarding, if the VNC Server is not directly reachable from the client. I played years ago with NX Server ( not FreeNX) over a WAN. It worked well and was fairly useable. They claim to be more efficient then VNC, as the NX protocol is interweaved with the X11 protocol itself. Best regards Jörg Am Sonntag 27 Mai 2007 schrieb Conway S. Smith: On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:47:36 -0400 (EDT) Nuitari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is it possible to run a complete Gnome desktop from a remote location through ssh? I'm not talking about using vnc to watch a remote desktop but actually run one remotely and only have it displayed here. SSH also includes functionality to allow X11 forwarding through the encrypted SSH connection. You'll need a fast (100mbps+) lan for it, even with the ssh compression enabled. True (although I'd say 10mbps can be fast enough, depending on how much other network traffic there is), but with a fast enough network slow enough processors, it can be better NOT to use compression, as compression requires CPU time on both sides of the connection, possibly adding more latency than would be saved by lower data transfer on the network. VNC is a much more efficient protocol then X11 for remote desktop. For running a complete Gnome desktop session, I'd agree VNC is usually better. But for running individual remote programs that use smaller windows, X can be pretty efficient. And there's other advantages X has over VNC, like hardware accelerated graphics. Conway S. Smith -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
Joerg Gollnick wrote: I played years ago with NX Server ( not FreeNX) over a WAN. It worked well and was fairly useable. They claim to be more efficient then VNC, as the NX protocol is interweaved with the X11 protocol itself. Best regards Jörg I gave up on freeNX on amd64 a while ago - it was just too hard to keep the thing working. It was faster, but it was a real mess getting it working at all (at the time it didn't support 64-bit). Perhaps things have changed... I'm using tightvnc with Xvnc and it works just fine for remote access to my machine. But don't plan on games or anything like that - many games refuse to launch if they're 3D. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
[gentoo-amd64] Sun and GPL
le Sun, 27 May 2007 08:48:11 +0200 Joerg Gollnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit: [ Sujet: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely? ] If you access a remote machine on a regular base outside the LAN, you have the choice: open source solutions VNC and FreeNX or closed source solution (Sun Global Desktop / Citrix ...). I've heard that Sun recently released the Java platform under GPL, and that all of their softs are going to follow in a near future. I've synced portage 2 days ago and dev-java/sun-jre-bin is still licensed against dlj-1.1 . Does anybody know how long it can take to have the license changed? Will it change at the occasion of a new release or is it applicable with the current version? Does it mean we'll have a 64-bit java web browser plugin some day? $ eselect java-nsplugin list Available 32-bit Java browser plugins [1] emul-linux-x86-java-1.5 current Available 64-bit Java browser plugins -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
On 5/26/07, Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, You have two choice, you can use Xvnc (its a pure-vnc X server). Or you can use something like Xdmcp. On Sat, 2007-26-05 at 12:07 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: Hi, Is it possible to run a complete Gnome desktop from a remote location through ssh? I'm not talking about using vnc to watch a remote desktop but actually run one remotely and only have it displayed here. Thanks, Mark -- Olivier and all others who responded: Thanks for the info. As always I appreciate it. I have looked at the links everyone provided but I think they are way over my head. I'm looking for an end-user sort of solution here. Thanks in advance for helping me. The issue here, for me, is not running X apps on the remote machine. I do that already. My dad, who is now 78 and happily running Gentoo Linux for over 4 years now, gets by when he has an application problem by asking me to log in and fix things with the app. For instance, when I update Evolution or when he changed ISPs recently I often need to go fix individual configuration items. I do that just running the app over an SSH tunnel with X forwarding turned on. No problems other than the speed. The case I'm looking at now is that either he or my mom will tell me something about what they are seeing their desktop, like a Gnome launcher or some other thing, which isn't working correctly. I want to see what they are seeing. Keep in mind I don't know which account this is until they send me an email. I understand I could do this with VNC. I've done that in the past with my dad sitting at the machine. Unfortunately neither of them seems comfortable starting applications like VNC and often I'm working on this machine when they are not around or have gone to bed. What I want to do is actually log in as one of them, start a Gnome session and see their desktop as they would see it but displayed here 350 miles away in a window on my machine. I'm not *overly* worried about display speed. I understand it will be slow. (Very slow...) I've dealt with that for years now. However I've never been able to fix desktop launchers or configure the Gnome panel for them without them running VNC which just doesn't work. What I'm hoping to find is a simple, end user type description of how to set up to run a remote session like this. I don't currently understand all the technical aspect of these different technologies, like XDMCP, etc., but I figure I'll learn as I go along. (As I always have...) It didn't seem to me that any of the links so far addressed this, or at least at a level that someone like me would understand. However maybe I'm just not understanding the technologies well enough yet to see the answer staring me in the face. Anyway, the simpler the better for me. Thanks, Mark -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
Ok, well what I would do, don't know if this is what you're looking for, I would edit /home/user/.autostart (.xinitrc?), or what have you, and just add the command to start vnc. That way it would always be running and no one would have to start anything. I'm not sure which file it is, I don't know if .xinitrc is run by X server or if you can throw some commands in there as well. Someone else can probably tell you what it is better than I can. -Peter On 5/27/07, Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/26/07, Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, You have two choice, you can use Xvnc (its a pure-vnc X server). Or you can use something like Xdmcp. On Sat, 2007-26-05 at 12:07 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote: Hi, Is it possible to run a complete Gnome desktop from a remote location through ssh? I'm not talking about using vnc to watch a remote desktop but actually run one remotely and only have it displayed here. Thanks, Mark -- Olivier and all others who responded: Thanks for the info. As always I appreciate it. I have looked at the links everyone provided but I think they are way over my head. I'm looking for an end-user sort of solution here. Thanks in advance for helping me. The issue here, for me, is not running X apps on the remote machine. I do that already. My dad, who is now 78 and happily running Gentoo Linux for over 4 years now, gets by when he has an application problem by asking me to log in and fix things with the app. For instance, when I update Evolution or when he changed ISPs recently I often need to go fix individual configuration items. I do that just running the app over an SSH tunnel with X forwarding turned on. No problems other than the speed. The case I'm looking at now is that either he or my mom will tell me something about what they are seeing their desktop, like a Gnome launcher or some other thing, which isn't working correctly. I want to see what they are seeing. Keep in mind I don't know which account this is until they send me an email. I understand I could do this with VNC. I've done that in the past with my dad sitting at the machine. Unfortunately neither of them seems comfortable starting applications like VNC and often I'm working on this machine when they are not around or have gone to bed. What I want to do is actually log in as one of them, start a Gnome session and see their desktop as they would see it but displayed here 350 miles away in a window on my machine. I'm not *overly* worried about display speed. I understand it will be slow. (Very slow...) I've dealt with that for years now. However I've never been able to fix desktop launchers or configure the Gnome panel for them without them running VNC which just doesn't work. What I'm hoping to find is a simple, end user type description of how to set up to run a remote session like this. I don't currently understand all the technical aspect of these different technologies, like XDMCP, etc., but I figure I'll learn as I go along. (As I always have...) It didn't seem to me that any of the links so far addressed this, or at least at a level that someone like me would understand. However maybe I'm just not understanding the technologies well enough yet to see the answer staring me in the face. Anyway, the simpler the better for me. Thanks, Mark -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
Mark Knecht wrote: What I want to do is actually log in as one of them, start a Gnome session and see their desktop as they would see it but displayed here 350 miles away in a window on my machine. Ah, what you want is remote framebuffer support. kde-base/krfb will do the trick, and I know there is a gnome equivalent (but I don't know what it is called). It uses vnc, and it essentially runs as a daemon if you configure it correctly. I'm not sure where it is, but I'm guessing somewhere in the gnome control panel you can enable it. Then you can connect to display :0 and see whatever is on the console. Note that I'm not sure if you'll see anything using direct hardware rendering (like mplayer-using-xv/etc). And as you expect it is a bit slow. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Can I run a complete desktop remotely?
Mark Knecht wrote:
Olivier and all others who responded:
Thanks for the info. As always I appreciate it. I have looked at the
links everyone provided but I think they are way over my head. I'm
looking for an end-user sort of solution here. Thanks in advance for
helping me.
The issue here, for me, is not running X apps on the remote machine. I
do that already. My dad, who is now 78 and happily running Gentoo
Linux for over 4 years now, gets by when he has an application problem
by asking me to log in and fix things with the app. For instance, when
I update Evolution or when he changed ISPs recently I often need to go
fix individual configuration items. I do that just running the app
over an SSH tunnel with X forwarding turned on. No problems other than
the speed.
Hi,
just another hint beside the others:
I use x11vnc for such scenarios: I ssh into the machine as the user
running the X session, start up x11vnc -display :0, and then just run
vncviewer remote_host:0 on my computer
There are a few things to note however: the x11vnc must be able to
connect to the xserver (I mean authentication through XAUTH)
with KDM (regardless of the session you choose, just the display
manager) it just worked for me, gdm may be worse and you may have to set
up correct XAUTHORITY
If the user has not logged in already (there's the kdm/gdm login screen
on the remote computer still) you _have_ to set the XAUTH. With kdm the
xauth file is /var/run/xauth/A:${DISPLAY}-some_random_chars, accesible
only from root. You have to run the x11vnc as root with the xauth file,
for example:
x11vnc -display :0 -auth /var/run/xauth/A:0-crR0kF
There also used to be directly a module for the X server that you could
load and just connect to the screen anytime with vncviewer without the
need to run x11vnc a to play with xauth... But I played with it a long
time ago, it was a seperate module etc... I remember vaguely that it was
either included in standard xorg or something.. but I don't really know
OK, after I wrote this I found
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Use_VNC_to_connect_to_existing_X_Sessions
;)))
there's the x11vnc way (with a way to set up kde to always start it, and
the locations of xauth files for gdm, ... ;), and also the X extension
way (you just need to emerge vnc with server use flag, and it should
install the vnc module for Xserver, configuration is on the wiki page)
yoyo
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL
Isidore Ducasse [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 27 May 2007 13:11:03 +0200: I've heard that Sun recently released the Java platform under GPL, and that all of their softs are going to follow in a near future. Not necessarily (or likely) /all/ their software, but significant parts of it. OpenSolaris is currently CDDL, which /is/ OSI approved as a real open license, but was designed in part deliberately to be GPLv2 incompatible. Apparently, they weren't interested in Linux stealing their technologies, which they thought would happen if they made it GPLv2 compatible. They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I for one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much against early GPLv3 drafts. Linus at least has apparently changed his mind with the later ones, but again, we'll have to see, and it would take nearly all of the big contributors current and past agreeing for it to be practical, and even then there'd likely be a period of several years where it was dual licensed v2 and v3 until all those who couldn't be reached or didn't agree could have their v2 code written out of it. Eventually, the v2 side could be dropped, after all the v2 only code was gone. But they have other software as well. Java, however, you are right, GPLv2 is what they've announced, but again, it's taking some time. Much of it is now, but not the complete stack. I've synced portage 2 days ago and dev-java/sun-jre-bin is still licensed against dlj-1.1 . Does anybody know how long it can take to have the license changed? Will it change at the occasion of a new release or is it applicable with the current version? Does it mean we'll have a 64-bit java web browser plugin some day? What Gentoo is doing, from what I've seen based on some of the smaller Java packages, is eliminating the -bin version and switching to a standard (for Gentoo) sources based ebuild. I've not followed Java / that/ closely as it hasn't been open source, and I won't install it until it is, but I've been following the developments here as I come across them. The Gentoo Java devs are working on it, but as I said, I don't believe enough of the entire Java infrastructure has been released as GPL yet to do the entire thing as sources. Even after it has, it'll take several months as experimental ebuilds in the Java overlay (emerge layman and read up on using it, if interested), before it is considered stable enough to release into the main tree, even as ~arch. Then it'll be in ~arch for awhile, while any bugs the ~arch users find being worked out, before it makes it to stable. So, I'm not /real/ close to things, talk to devs on the Java herd if you want real detail, but an intelligent guess based on the above that I know is that it'll be several months, likely late this year or early next, before full source based Sun blessed Java is in the main tree, almost certainly before it reaches stable. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL
le Sun, 27 May 2007 23:32:49 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit: Not necessarily (or likely) /all/ their software, but significant parts of it. OpenSolaris is currently CDDL, which /is/ OSI approved as a real open license, but was designed in part deliberately to be GPLv2 incompatible. Apparently, they weren't interested in Linux stealing their technologies, which they thought would happen if they made it GPLv2 compatible. Solaris' dev team had diverging points of view about GPL being relevant for a private firm as Sun. Now it looks like there was room for a single conception over there. They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I for one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). You mean the bare kernel, right? Solaris' kernel could be an alternative to linux? Is the latter really different from the *BSD's? I've installed a NetBSD on my machine for fun recently (tho I switched back to using my good'ol gentoo, can't get used to anything else now. pkgsrc looks like a sympathetic old auntie); it appears to practice monolithic kernel. What would be different in running a GPLv3 kernel? I've read about the anti-DRM part of it; is there some other reason you/we could be interested in it? BTW isn't there a technical issue licensing a single version of a soft against two incompatible licenses? Or did you mean dual-licensing GPLv2 and GPLv3? Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much against early GPLv3 drafts. Is it a matter of diverging positions towards industrial partners/users? The Gentoo Java devs are working on it, but as I said, I don't believe enough of the entire Java infrastructure has been released as GPL yet to do the entire thing as sources. Even after it has, it'll take several months as experimental ebuilds in the Java overlay (emerge layman and read up on using it, if interested) Ok! Does anyone know the difference between the java-overlay and the java-gcj-overlay? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL
On 5/27/07, Isidore Ducasse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: le Sun, 27 May 2007 23:32:49 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit: Not necessarily (or likely) /all/ their software, but significant parts of it. OpenSolaris is currently CDDL, which /is/ OSI approved as a real open license, but was designed in part deliberately to be GPLv2 incompatible. Apparently, they weren't interested in Linux stealing their technologies, which they thought would happen if they made it GPLv2 compatible. Solaris' dev team had diverging points of view about GPL being relevant for a private firm as Sun. Now it looks like there was room for a single conception over there. They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I for one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). You mean the bare kernel, right? Solaris' kernel could be an alternative to linux? Is the latter really different from the *BSD's? I've installed a NetBSD on my machine for fun recently (tho I switched back to using my good'ol gentoo, can't get used to anything else now. pkgsrc looks like a sympathetic old auntie); it appears to practice monolithic kernel. What would be different in running a GPLv3 kernel? I've read about the anti-DRM part of it; is there some other reason you/we could be interested in it? BTW isn't there a technical issue licensing a single version of a soft against two incompatible licenses? Or did you mean dual-licensing GPLv2 and GPLv3? Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much against early GPLv3 drafts. Is it a matter of diverging positions towards industrial partners/users? The Gentoo Java devs are working on it, but as I said, I don't believe enough of the entire Java infrastructure has been released as GPL yet to do the entire thing as sources. Even after it has, it'll take several months as experimental ebuilds in the Java overlay (emerge layman and read up on using it, if interested) Ok! Does anyone know the difference between the java-overlay and the java-gcj-overlay? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list The thing I've wondered about GPL'ing java, is when do we finally get a native 64 bit browser plugin? Wil -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL
On Sunday 27 May 2007, Isidore Ducasse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL': le Sun, 27 May 2007 23:32:49 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit: They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I for one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). You mean the bare kernel, right? Solaris' kernel could be an alternative to linux? Solaris' kernel *is* an alternative to Linux. It's available under an OSI license in at least three distributions (including the one from Sun). Is the latter really different from the *BSD's? From what I understand, yes. They both have the old-skool Unix flavor, that reminds you that GNU really is *not* Unix, but their feature sets and userland are very different. it appears to practice monolithic kernel. IIRC, that's correct about all the *BSDs and Solaris. What would be different in running a GPLv3 kernel? I've read about the anti-DRM part of it; is there some other reason you/we could be interested in it? The anti-DRM stuff has been scaled back quite a bit in the last draft. As is proper, it no longer prevents the kernel from being part of an effective content protection mechanism or otherwise restricting how GPLv3 licensed software is *used*. It does still prevent a distributor from giving you something you could theoretically modify but disallowing the use of modified versions in the same context. (Or, at least it tries.) BTW isn't there a technical issue licensing a single version of a soft against two incompatible licenses? No. The QPL is quite incompatible with the GPL and Qt has been dual-licensed for some time under their disjunction. There's very few technical issues involved with licensing at all, anyway. Is a kernel module a derivative work of the kernel? and Does dynamic linking against (e.g.) readline produce a derivative work of readline? are /legal/ issues, not technical ones. For the record the accepted answers right now are: Yes (per the kernel hackers -- making fglrx and nvidia kernel modules impossible to legally distribute) and Yes (per the FSF -- although it doesn't matter much since that work is never distributed) Or did you mean dual-licensing GPLv2 and GPLv3? FWIW, these will be incompatible. The additional restrictions the GPLv3 places on distributors w.r.t. DRM are not allowed by strict reading of the GPLv2 and the GPLv2 doesn't allow additional restrictions to be added. It is harder to argue that w.r.t. software patents, since the GPLv2 does contain a section the FSF claims is an implicit patent licence. Still, dual-licensing under incompatible licenses is fine and I think many (but maybe not most) developers that currently license their code under GPLv2 will be willing to license under the GPLv3 as well (or instead). Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much against early GPLv3 drafts. Is it a matter of diverging positions towards industrial partners/users? The problems Linus' had with early drafts were two-fold: 1) Early drafts has usage restrictions, although the license didn't have to be accepted to use what was covered. Usage restrictions violate the DFSG and the Free Software Definition. Also, the way the license was worded your usage wasn't restricted until you tried to distribute, which is just odd. 2) Linus had a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal terms involved and believed strongly that using the GPLv3 would require any distributor make use of PKI to disclose their private keys. In particular, he was under the impression that packages signed with GPG keys (like Debian uses as a security layer) would require they publish the key used for signing. It seems the license has been fixed on both counts. The usage restrictions have been dropped, and the remaining text concerning DRM has been changed to mean the same thing while being clearer to laypersons. (And clarity to laypersons is very important; developers are more likely to use a license they can read and understand themselves.) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
