paul at clubi.ie wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Jason Corcoran wrote:
>>> It should be a case of (from you client machine) ensuring that the
>> server machine has the right to start X apps so run xhost + <ip>
>>> Next ssh into the server, export DISPLAY=<clientIp>:0.0 and then
>> start up your app that you are interested in.
>> This should never be needed with SSH forwarding of X. Indeed, your
> instructions have no need of SSH - you would have been better
> suggesting the reader use 'rlogin' as it would at least be clear just
> how insecure this is.
>>> As mentioned you could also use ssh +x
>> Change "could" to "should".
I found using X via network that if the connection lost or you
accidently killed the X-Server on the client all the server applications
would close losing any unsaved data. With VNC the network traffic is
less and closing VNC or losing connection has no effect on Server
Applications. However to run X-Applications SEAMLESSLY on Windows
Desktop (each remote application is in its own Windows Window) or on
an X-Desktop, the VNC has disadvantage it is not integrated. The entire
remote desktop is one window.
It to an extent depend what you want to do. VNC on a very wide range of
gadgets and OSes on WiFi or Internet is maybe better. On a reliable
cabled 100M or 1G Switch LAN where seamless use is needed then X is
better (your client need not be Linux running an X Server, but can be
Windows, OS X, OS 9, Solaris etc... even some gadgets). Some
non-Linux/Unix versions of X Server can't run applications per window on
the native desktop but create a separate desktop in a Window for the
Remote PC, in this case VNC is better.
Windows X support does not seem to have improved since 1999 when I first
looked at it. The "free" and/or "open Source" X Servers tend to be poor
and implement a separate desktop. The only "seamless" ones seem to be
quite expensive commercial.
Because Windows is expect to provide a lot of GUI services to a Program,
and generic X application is really a graphics terminal window assuming
nothing about the desktop, it is in theory much easier to have seamless
X applications (local on Cygwin or MS Services for UNIX, or on a remote
server) on Program Manager or Explorer than have Windows Applications
run at all seamlessly in Linux (via Wine) or Windows with Program
Manager / Explorer replaced by an X-Window Manager and X -Server. (yes
it *IS* possible to switch on the Posix subsystem, install MS UNIX
Services For Windows and make Shell= favorite X-Manager instead of
Explorer. You need a 3rd party X-Server. MS UNIX serivices doesn't have
one and Cygwin really needs 3rd party too. If you do this, you may find
that only OS2 console programs work properly! Yep they STILL have OS2
native console support in NT).
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!