[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       opensolaris-desktop-discuss
Subject:    Re: [desktop-discuss] Moving from RealVNC to TigerVNC?
From:       Octave Orgeron <unixconsole () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2009-04-27 21:25:24
Message-ID: 994153.36406.qm () web30804 ! mail ! mud ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Hi Alan,

I think it makes sense for us to look ahead on things like this that could easily \
become dead-ends due to better alternatives. Are there any other contenders to \
consider? If not, then the choice is pretty simple, migrate to TigerVNC once it's \
ready.  

 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Octave J. Orgeron
Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant
Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com
E-Mail: unixconsole@yahoo.com
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*



----- Original Message ----
From: Alan Coopersmith <Alan.Coopersmith@Sun.COM>
To: OpenSolaris X Window System List <xwin-discuss@opensolaris.org>
Cc: Desktop Discuss <desktop-discuss@opensolaris.org>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 3:35:02 PM
Subject: [desktop-discuss] Moving from RealVNC to TigerVNC?

We've been using RealVNC for the vncviewer & Xvnc implementation
in OpenSolaris, but the upstream is moribund, with only one trivial
security fix in years, since the RealVNC developers seem to be
concentrating on their commercial fork.   We'd actually adopted the
Fedora RPM as our upstream, since they'd already done the hard parts,
like porting it to build on Xorg modular sources and adding IPv6 support
and various other useful updates.

They've now grown tired of maintaining it all by themselves, and have
joined with some former TightVNC developers and the VirtualGL project
to start a new TigerVNC fork:

   http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.tight-vnc.general/8610/
   http://tigervnc.sourceforge.net/

While I've done the work to port ours forward to build against Xorg 1.6,
so we're not held back by it, I am seriously considering moving to
TigerVNC once they've had a stable release, as it seems like it can
replace both the RealVNC shipped in X, and the TurboVNC packages that
the Shared/Scalable Visualization project shipped in /opt/SUNWtvnc
to support VirtualGL.

Is there any reason this would be a bad idea?

-- 
    -Alan Coopersmith-          alan.coopersmith@sun.com
     Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering

_______________________________________________
desktop-discuss mailing list
desktop-discuss@opensolaris.org



      
_______________________________________________
desktop-discuss mailing list
desktop-discuss@opensolaris.org


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]