single linux box on dsl?
Jeremy Brown
jeremy at cadre5.com
Fri May 14 13:33:29 UTC 2004
William Hooper wrote:
>Jeremy Brown said:
>
>
>>Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I'm curious why anybody would want to do X forwarding when it seems to me
>>>that VNC would be faster and easier, not to mention more robust (if the
>>>network connection dies, the session is still there on the server,
>>>waiting
>>>for me).
>>>
>>>Am I missing something? Is X forwarding better than VNC in some way?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>VNC requires root access on the server to set up.
>>
>>
>
>I don't see any reason why it would. It doesn't use any privledged ports.
>
>
Yeah, seconds after I fired off that last email I started thinking,
"wait, I'm not sure that's true". For some reason I thought it had to
start X with an alternate configuration or something, which required
root access. But I may be wrong.
>>VNC is also limited
>>to one user at a time.
>>
>>
>
>Huh? Multiple users can look at the same VNC session and multiple VNC
>sessions can be started on a single machine.
>
>
That's true...I guess I should have said "each VNC session can only do
one thing at a time". In order for N users to have separate VNC access
to a machine, you'd have to start at least N VNC servers on it, and
assign ports/passwords to each user. This quickly ends up being a
hassle in my opinion, since the equivalent X forwarding setup requires
almost zero configuration.
Also, AFAIK each VNC server requires a completely separate running
instance of X, which can gobble up your memory quickly. Again, the
equivalent X forwarding setup only takes as much memory as the client
application needs.
Jeremy
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list