Re: single linux box on dsl?
From: William Hooper (whooperhsd3_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 05/14/04
- Previous message: Jurgen Kramer: "Re: [OT] hardware SATA raid which is 32-bit PCI compatible?"
- In reply to: Benjamin J. Weiss: "Re: single linux box on dsl?"
- Next in thread: Guy Fraser: "Re: single linux box on dsl?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 09:12:21 -0400 (EDT) To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Benjamin J. Weiss said:
> 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?
It just depends on what you use it for. I have one headless box that is
only used to run a server (Qcast tuner, but that isn't important). VNC is
installed on it because the server requires a GUI. I have another
headless box, running other servers, that I don't generally use VNC on. I
don't need the feature of persistent sessions (that's what screen is for
:-) and I very seldom use anything GUI on it. Given the option of
starting a VNC session and waiting for GNOME to start or just typing
"redhat-config-users" into the SSH window I usually use is a no-brainer.
-- William Hooper -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Previous message: Jurgen Kramer: "Re: [OT] hardware SATA raid which is 32-bit PCI compatible?"
- In reply to: Benjamin J. Weiss: "Re: single linux box on dsl?"
- Next in thread: Guy Fraser: "Re: single linux box on dsl?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
