[Sugar-devel] The ARM is near

[Benjamin M. Schwartz]

Peter Robinson wrote:
> Fedora doesn't have x11vnc because it uses tigervnc which is a fork
> based on tinyvnc (I think) which is massively optimised over the
> original vnc. So why is that not usable?

Why is what not usable?  x11vnc is a VNC server that connects to a
pre-existing X session and listens for DAMAGE events, which it uses to
update a virtual framebuffer.  The only other server I'm aware of that
behaves this way is Vino, which can only be launched by the Gnome session
daemon, not as a standalone program.

tightvnc and tigervnc may provide this functionality, but I cannot find
any documentation to indicate that they do.  Neither was packaged for
Fedora 9, so this would not help to get my activity working on existing XO
Sugar deployments.  Moreover, I feel it's important that my activity run
in deployments like Uruguay's where students do not have root access, and
so cannot install system packages.

> The problem with providing
> copies of things like statically linked applications is that they are
> then not open to the usual security updates etc.

Activities are not designed to be secure.  Like javascript webapps,
they're untrusted, and run in an isolation shell.  However, I absolutely
agree that shipping static binaries is a terrible idea... which is why I'm
trying to find a better alternative.

> I would have thought
> that gtk-vnc-python would be completely unusable in Fedora without
> some form of VNC in Fedora so if x11vnx wasn't there it must have been
> replaced with something else.

gtk-vnc is purely a VNC client, not a VNC server.  They are independent.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090828/a6a7e4f8/attachment.pgp