Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Steps Towards Network Transparency For Wayland (phoronix.com)

Posted by timothy on from the reinventing-x-but-better dept.

munwin99 writes: For the longest time, when bringing up Wayland a recurring question was 'what about network transparency?!' Well, Samsung's Derek Foreman has today published the set of Wayland patches for providing Wayland network transparency by pushing the Wayland protocol over TCP/IP.

5 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Seriously?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What people want is ssh -X and yes it is a top priority to many.

  2. Re:It's 2016 and I can't even easily run Wayland y by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Previously, the developers always refused to consider network transparency, and heated discussions followed. If now it is accepted, it is newsworthy for those who care about the feature, even though nobody can actually run Wayland yet.

  3. Re:Seriously?? by gtwrek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I concur. VMs, embedded hardware, headless machines- I'm on them all day. And ssh -X is all that I need working for my environment. As long as that works, everything else just is seamless. I think we're not going to see a reduction in VM's. And the number/amount of embedded hardware's only growing.

    Now, X certainly has ugly warts. I'm hopeful for what Wayland's offering. This network transparency patch for Wayland sounds like a great start.

    --Mark

  4. Re:Seriously?? by Arkh89 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I do, why am I wrong?
    Typical usage : I log onto distant machine, start working in command line (vim, python, matlab -nodesktop), then at some point I will need to display a couple of graphs or images. That's a relatively small graphical payload for which I *do not* want to use VNC. With ssh -X I get the windows to be displayed locally just as if I was doing the work on my light-weight terminal.

  5. vnc is to X as penthouse is to girlfriend by raymorris · · Score: 5, Informative

    X is a protocol for graphical interface elements, such as application windows. With remote X, the application's window IS on your local screen, using the remote cpu and fileystem. It's part of your local desktop, a real, local window.

    VNC is a highly compressed PICTURE of a remote desktop.

    Since X is the real thing, and VNC is a low quality PICTURE of what X is actually doing, it's just like you're saying that a porno mag is better than an actual girlfriend. Your comment is THAT ridiculous.

    Besides the fact that you seemingly don't know the difference between an application and a desktop environment.

    If you ever want to stop masturbating with VNC and try the real thing, use vnc -Y -C . Y is a better version of -X, and -C enables lossless compression, which is very useful on most networks.