[Desktop_architects] The experience of an ISV
mhopf at suse.de
Tue Feb 14 12:03:14 PST 2006
On Feb 14, 06 14:50:06 -0500, Jim Gettys wrote:
> Xtst is a local only "solution". As such, it doesn't help LTSP.
IMHO it is not a solution at all. It is an ugly workaround, a kludge.
> There are (at least) two ways to solve this problem, that can/should be
> discussed on the xdg list:
> o use of a X property somewhere to communicate with a session
> management daemon (or window manager) of this desire.
> o use of an out of band mechanism like DBUS.
> Either is satisfactory from my perspective. Note that a proper solution
> using DBUS will beg cross system issues (and making dbus secure across
> the network); this ought to be done in any case (I know some work was
> done to add security to dbus in the past; I don't know its current
> status). Folks like LTSP (and others) really care about running over
> the network, and this should be possible.
I think something related to the X protocol (e.g. *no* DBUS) is much
more convenient, because one wants to disable the screen saver on a
particular display. Authorization and identification comes for free when
done using the X protocol.
Matthias Hopf <mhopf at suse.de> __ __ __
Maxfeldstr. 5 / 90409 Nuernberg (_ | | (_ |__ mat at mshopf.de
Phone +49-911-74053-715 __) |_| __) |__ labs www.mshopf.de
More information about the Desktop_architects