[ILUG] low bandwidch X forwarding protocol?

[Conor Daly]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 09:56:47AM +0100 or so it is rumoured hereabouts, 
Lars Hecking thought:
> Gavin McCullagh writes:
> > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Conor Daly wrote:
> > 
> > > At work we are about to run a test of a remote access server.  The
> > > proposed GUI forwarding method is citrix based on its low bandwidth
> > > consumption.  However we will have full network access from linux clients.
> > > X forwarding and VNC are apparently much more bandwidth intensive.  Are
> > > there any free protocols out there that will let me access my work desktop
> > > (FC5) with as low bandwidth consumption as citrix?
> > 
> > A year or two ago there was huge hype about NX and FreeNX.
> > 
> > http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8480
> > http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8477
> > http://www.gnomeuser.org/documents/howto/nx.html
> > http://www.nomachine.com/
> > 
> > But I must say I haven't heard a peep about it for a year or more now.
> 
>  We were recently playing with it here, and NX beats the crap out of
>  X/Citrix/VNC/Windows native remote in terms of responsiveness.

Testing testing 1.. 2.. 3.. 4..  Ooooh!!

CentoOS 4 on the home server:
rpm -Uvh nxclient...rpm nxserver...rpm nxnode...rpm

FC5 on work desktop
rpm -Uvh nxclient...rpm

Error libstdc++-libc6.2-2.3 required.

yum installlocal nxclient...rpm

yum: installing compat-libstdc++-296
yum: package nxclient...rpm is not signed

yum install compat-libstdc++-296

rpm -Uvh nxclient...rpm

/usr/NX/bin/nxclient


<me logs into home desktop>...

Had to enable passwords in my home sshd_config though.

Conor
-- 
Conor Daly <conor.daly at cod.homelinux.org>
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/G/S/O d+(-) s:+ a+ C++(+) UL++++ US++ P>++ L+++>++++ E--- W++ !N
PS+ PE Y+ PGP? tv(-) b+++(+) G e+++(*) h-- r+++ z++++ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
http://www.geekcode.com/ http://www.ebb.org/ungeek/