Re: Accessing a Desktop Remotely
From: Wayne Throop (throopw_at_sheol.org)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:44:08 GMT
: "David P. Donahue" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
: I've been using various flavors of VNC over the years for my remote X
: needs, with much success. However, I am now looking for something
: that will more closely resemble the "Remote Desktop" functionality
: that ships with WinXP Pro. That is, I would like to be able to
: remotely connect to the currently-logged-in console desktop and
: interface with the stuff I already have running. Also, I require that
: the local console be locked (no input or viewing of activity, just an
: "unlock" prompt of some sort) while I'm connected. Is there such a
: tool for Linux that can accomplish this?
The imperfections are, a person at the "locked out" keyboard has
various attacks they could try, depending on hardware and software
details, and the keyboard lockout is inconvenient, ie, it will
lock out both consoles until you go over to the other
computer and tell whoever nudged it to leave it alone.
But oh well.
: My backup plan is to use the first VNC display as my "default desktop"
: and, when logging in to the console, just run a full-screen VNC client
: to localhost:1. But I see that as one more step than is necessary.
: Can anyone recommend a tool that I can try for this?
Actually, that backup plan might perform better for remote access
than KDE screen sharing, x0vncserver or x11vnc; but no better than
the xf4vnc module for the X11 server.
What's best will depend on details of what you're doing, how much screen
lag is intolerable to your eye, how much time is spent on the primary
screen vs the remote screen, and so forth. If you spend most of your time
physically in front of the vnc-server-side machine, and access it remotely
mostly for checking on things, or lower-volume work, the x11vnc solution
might work well, and it doesn't require any advance prep of the screen
you want to remotely take over; any old X11 screen (including an
Xterminal) can be taken over by x11vnc. If on the other hand you spend
most of your time remote, actually running Xvnc as a separate server
is probably better than any take-over-the-hardware-server option.
That's just how I'd approach it, anyways. I use x11vnc, because I spend
most of my physically at themain machine, but sometimes check mail, long
running jobs, news, etc, etc, from a remote workstation; I don't have to
alter my day-to-day setup to do so, I just have to run an x11vnc via
script; further, the privacy issue isn't that bad for me.
In short, x11vnc is the "laziest" and most flexible method; I don't have
to decide when I start my X session that I might want to take it over
later, and I can take over remotely the most diverse set of servers.
xf4vnc is somewhat lazy (you just have to tweak your X11 config)
and somewhat flexible (you can take over any prepped linux machine).
Xvnc is most intrusive (you have to use a vnc cient all the time, whether
local or remote, and various changes to your rc scripts are likely to
be desirable) and least flexible (you can't take over any running session
except the one you pre-started), but it performs very well adn you can
park a virtual Xvnc session wherever you want for as long as you want.
So. Probably more than you wanted to hear, but there it is.
Wayne Throop email@example.com http://sheol.org/throopw