Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #5609 > unrolled thread

remote access with gui.

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  remote access with gui. "john@wexfordpress.com" <john@wexfordpress.com> - 2012-06-18 17:40 -0700
    Re: remote access with gui. Lew Pitcher <lpitcher@teksavvy.com> - 2012-06-18 21:01 -0400
    Re: remote access with gui. Bob Tennent <BobT@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-06-19 02:30 +0000
      Re: remote access with gui. J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-06-19 13:45 +0000
        Re: remote access with gui. Bob Tennent <BobT@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-06-19 17:08 +0000
    Re: remote access with gui. Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201206.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-06-20 08:35 +0200
      Re: remote access with gui. Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2012-06-20 13:26 +0530
        Re: remote access with gui. Stan Bischof <stan@worldbadminton.com> - 2012-06-20 15:05 +0000
    Re: remote access with gui. Douglas Mayne <none@invalid.com> - 2012-06-27 07:52 +0000
      Re: remote access with gui. Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-06-27 14:59 +0000
        Re: remote access with gui. Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2012-06-27 15:12 -0500
          Re: remote access with gui. Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-07-09 14:07 +0700

#5609 — remote access with gui.

I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network
is via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I
want to connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui
interface. The main system runs slackware 13.37 and the laptop has a
hard disk install of Knoppix.

Any thoughts on this?

John Culleton

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#5610

On Monday 18 June 2012 20:40, in comp.os.linux.misc, john@wexfordpress.com
wrote:

> I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network
> is via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I
> want to connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui
> interface. The main system runs slackware 13.37 and the laptop has a 
> hard disk install of Knoppix.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?

ssh with X forwarding from your laptop to your Slackware box. At the
commandline, start your GUI apps. If you really need a "desktop", start
Xnest, and within it a desktop manager

-- 
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5611

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:40:49 -0700 (PDT), john@wexfordpress.com wrote:
 > I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network
 > is via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I
 > want to connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui
 > interface. The main system runs slackware 13.37 and the laptop has a
 > hard disk install of Knoppix.

VNC was designed for this. But if you want to run a *single* application
on the remote system and have it display locally, install xpra:

http://xpra.org/

Much better performance than conventional X forwarding.

Bob T.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5618

On Tuesday, June 19th, 2012, at 02:30:41h +0000, Bob Tennent recommended:

> But if you want to run a *single* application
> on the remote system and have it display locally, install xpra:

Thank you for mentioning this.  I had not heard about xpra before
and sounds like the best solution for occasional remote X application
viewing over a slow link.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5619

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 13:45:39 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller wrote:
 > On Tuesday, June 19th, 2012, at 02:30:41h +0000, Bob Tennent recommended:
 >
 >> But if you want to run a *single* application
 >> on the remote system and have it display locally, install xpra:
 >
 > Thank you for mentioning this.  I had not heard about xpra before
 > and sounds like the best solution for occasional remote X application
 > viewing over a slow link.

I should have mentioned: xpra stands for X Persistent Remote Access.
The maintainer describes it as "screen for X" but I don't think that's
helpful or even accurate.

Bob T.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5621

"john@wexfordpress.com" <john@wexfordpress.com> wrote:

> I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network
> is via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I
> want to connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui
> interface.

X11 is very fat.  It's lousy over slow/narrowband connections.

Generically speaking, you need "NX technology".  I'm not sure where
the silly name comes from, but there are a few implementations out
there.  E.g. "NeatX", "NX", "FreeNX", "x2go".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5622

On 06/20/2012 12:05 PM, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> "john@wexfordpress.com" <john@wexfordpress.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network
>> is via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I
>> want to connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui
>> interface.

@OP, Enable XDMCP in the configuration of your X Desktop Manager and 
issue the following command from any vt:

$ X :1 -quiet -query $@ -terminate

assuming a local instance (:0) of X is already running.

> X11 is very fat.  It's lousy over slow/narrowband connections.

I have not checked performance over WiFi, but a 10 bit local network 
(LAN) is good enough for remote X connections over XDMCP :P

> Generically speaking, you need "NX technology".  I'm not sure where
> the silly name comes from, but there are a few implementations out
> there.  E.g. "NeatX", "NX", "FreeNX", "x2go".


-- 
Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman
(http://werc.homelinux.net/contact/)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5624

Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> wrote:
>> X11 is very fat.  It's lousy over slow/narrowband connections.
> 
> I have not checked performance over WiFi, but a 10 bit local network 
> (LAN) is good enough for remote X connections over XDMCP :P
> 

xdmcp works great over a LAN bandwidth. 
 WiFi is not an issue unless you have really
ancient wifi. Note that even a decent LAN however yields
noticeably slow response compared to native graphics.

But as noted, when you get "slow/narrowband connections" xdmcp
gets very sluggish. get down in the 100kb or so range and
it can be very hard to use. It is also very fragile under
such circumstances ( X is quite unhappy with even short
disconnect between client and server).

Also as noted, alternatives do exist that give much better
usability under similar bandwidth conditions.

Stan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5633

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:40:49 -0700, john@wexfordpress.com wrote:

> I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network is
> via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I want to
> connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui interface. The
> main system runs slackware 13.37 and the laptop has a hard disk install
> of Knoppix.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?
> 
> John Culleton
>
Here is a minimal discussion about tightVNC on Slackware:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.os.linux.slackware/msg/591f4a5f4ab493b2

The advantage of VNC over simple forwarding of X-apps is that the state 
of the desktop is retained. If you disconnect, then reconnect later, your 
desktop should be the way you left it. If that is something you want or 
need, then consider using VNC. Otherwise, individual applications using X-
forwarding over a ssh tunnel works quite easily, too.

-- 
Douglas Mayne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5634

On 2012-06-27, Douglas Mayne <none@invalid.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:40:49 -0700, john@wexfordpress.com wrote:
>
>> I have a base computer and a laptop on the same network.  The network is
>> via a wireless router. The laptop uses a wireless connection. I want to
>> connect to the main system from the laptop and have a gui interface. The
>> main system runs slackware 13.37 and the laptop has a hard disk install
>> of Knoppix.
>> 
>> Any thoughts on this?
>> 
>> John Culleton
>>
> Here is a minimal discussion about tightVNC on Slackware:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.os.linux.slackware/msg/591f4a5f4ab493b2
>
> The advantage of VNC over simple forwarding of X-apps is that the state 
> of the desktop is retained. If you disconnect, then reconnect later, your 
> desktop should be the way you left it. If that is something you want or 
> need, then consider using VNC. Otherwise, individual applications using X-
> forwarding over a ssh tunnel works quite easily, too.

That's only true on a fast connect (100M or faster).  It might work
over a wireless link, but you're pushing your luck.  Most "modern" X
apps are so increadibly bloated and badly written that they won't work
over anything slower than a 100Mbit wired Ethernet link.  Huge amounts
of useless info makes thousands of pointless round-trips between
client and server for even the most trivial action (mouse movement,
button click).  Using X forwarding over something like a 3Mb DSL link
just doesn't work these days for anything fancier than xterm: Things
like Gnome or KDE apps are completely out of the question in my
experience.

VNC works far better over slower connections.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I would like to
                                  at               urinate in an OVULAR,
                              gmail.com            porcelain pool --

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5636

Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:

>Using X forwarding over something like a 3Mb DSL link
>just doesn't work these days for anything fancier than xterm: Things
>like Gnome or KDE apps are completely out of the question in my
>experience.

I have ranted on this before. Modern toolkits and their use largely 
ignore and duplicate functionality that is in the core X or common 
libraries, and this results in massive amounts of rendering waste, 
easily detectable on a X-forwarded connection. However, in many 
ways, X forwarding is much preferrable to VNC. Of course, the 
idea of using many "modern" applications over either X or VNC is a 
scary thing to me. Fortunately, there are a lot of other 
applications and toolkits that do not take the same route as GTK 
and Qt, and that work much better over network connections. They 
are snappy and responsive over X forwarding and you can get the 
benefits of X forwarding without driving yourself up a wall. I 
find that to be my preferred solution instead of going VNC unless 
I need to share a screen with others. 

I recommend looking for applications written in toolkits like Motif, 
(install OpenMotif instead of using lesstif, though), Xlib, Xt, 
or some of the other lesser known toolkits. By default they look 
dated due to the default theming, but it is fairly straightforward 
to get them looking clean and modern. Once you have that, your 
experiences in remote GUI use will be much improved, IMO.

-- 
Aaron W. Hsu | arcfide@sacrideo.us | http://www.sacrideo.us
Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5644

>>>>> Aaron W Hsu <arcfide@sacrideo.us> writes:
>>>>> Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:

	[Cross-posting to news:comp.windows.x.]

 >> Using X forwarding over something like a 3Mb DSL link just doesn't
 >> work these days for anything fancier than xterm: Things like Gnome
 >> or KDE apps are completely out of the question in my experience.

 > I have ranted on this before.  Modern toolkits and their use largely
 > ignore and duplicate functionality that is in the core X or common
 > libraries, and this results in massive amounts of rendering waste,
 > easily detectable on a X-forwarded connection.

	I still remember playing some X games over a 14400 bit/s modem
	connection.

[...]

 > I find that to be my preferred solution instead of going VNC unless I
 > need to share a screen with others.

	Though, ISTR, there were (are?) solutions for "screen sharing"
	based on the X protocol.

[...]

 > I recommend looking for applications written in toolkits like Motif,
 > (install OpenMotif instead of using lesstif, though),

	... Or vice versa, for those preferring free software.
	(Open Motif is /not/ free software, according to either the FSF
	definition or DFSG.  It's part of "non-Debian" non-free, for
	instance.)

 > Xlib, Xt, or some of the other lesser known toolkits.  By default
 > they look dated due to the default theming, but it is fairly
 > straightforward to get them looking clean and modern.

	It's my guess that it's up to /us/, the ones interested in Xt,
	to create such themes.

 > Once you have that, your experiences in remote GUI use will be much
 > improved, IMO.

	My guess is that there're quite a few "broken" Xt applications,
	including those performing needless refreshes.

-- 
FSF associate member #7257

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web