Obsoleteness of X concept - X

This is a discussion on Obsoleteness of X concept - X ; Joe Pfeiffer writes: >anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: >> I guess the tunneling part is the easy part, but one would probably >> have to mount the stick in some way on the remote system, and it >> should only be ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Obsoleteness of X concept

  1. Re: Obsoleteness of X concept

    Joe Pfeiffer writes:
    >anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
    >> I guess the tunneling part is the easy part, but one would probably
    >> have to mount the stick in some way on the remote system, and it
    >> should only be accessible by the user. If we want near-universal
    >> support (i.e., many platforms) for that, that's quite a lot of work.
    >> In Linux, one can probably implement it through FUSE.

    >
    >Come to think of it, now that your bring up FUSE, it would probably be
    >pretty straightforward to do it with sshfs.


    Yes. I see the following problems:

    1) One needs FUSE and sshfs on the remote machine. But something like
    that is unavoidable, as mentioned above.

    2) If I understand it correctly, sshfs needs an sshd on a machine
    where the USB stick is mounted. I don't have sshd on my home machine,
    and I don't want it (nobody has to log into there). I would prefer if
    I could set up an ssh tunnel from my home machine to the remote
    machine, and if a version of sshfs could work through that.

    3) As a variation of the above, even if the machine I work from has an
    sshd, I usually cannot log into it from the remote machines with
    public-key-authentication, but instead need a password (unlike the
    other direction). With the ssh-tunnel setup described above, I would
    avoid having to type the password, which is not just annoying, but
    also a security risk.

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

  2. Re: Obsoleteness of X concept

    Joe Pfeiffer writes:
    >anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
    >>>Your example of being able to print at home is one that resonates with
    >>>me -- except that I've got two desktops and two laptops at home, and
    >>>only one of the four has a printer.

    >>
    >> But I guess all four can use that printer, right?

    >
    >Yes -- my point exactly. While working on a school machine from home,
    >I don't necessarily want to print from the machine I'm working from.
    >
    >As you say above in the post I'm responding to, the machine I'm on
    >knows how to print to other machines on my network -- but this seems
    >like an argument for tunnelling IPP over ssh, not printing from X.


    My idea was that if we tunneled through X, the X server would accept
    the print job and pass it to lpr (or CUPS or whatever), and that would
    know how to print on the printer you want, even if it's on a different
    machine than your X server.

    But yes, printing through an ssh tunnel would be ok, too.

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

  3. Re: Obsoleteness of X concept

    k what was the discussion? i think we've got the idea that remote
    things is cool.
    so we're not going to remove tcp/ip from X.. but it doesnt answer the
    question
    if it should be used for a standalone non-networked machine. are there
    other
    ways for an X server to communicate with each other, i.e for a
    multihead setup?

  4. Re: Obsoleteness of X concept

    On Aug 22, 11:07*am, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > Temoto wrote:
    >
    > < snip >
    >
    > > There is crossplatform VNC. I've heard that its protocol is much more
    > > network friendly than one of X.

    >
    > You have heard wrong
    >
    > > Anyway, you're limited to screen and keyboard/mouse.

    >
    > Wrong
    >
    > > There is no remote sound

    >
    > Wrong
    >
    > > and printers in X

    >
    > Pray tell, what is the remote printer sitting on the network in my setup
    > doing then? As well as the remote scanner and the remote fax?
    >
    > > . Those are equally part of user *
    > > interface along with screen and keyboard.

    >
    > Fine. Please, demonstrate that you know what you are talking about then
    >
    > < snip >
    > --
    > This problem was sponsored by Microsoft


    Suppose, i have a box at home and i connect to it from job office. Run
    PDF viewer at home machine through ssh-tunneling of X protocol. When i
    press 'Print', it is completely useless for me to have page printed at
    home. And i have no way to set up remote printer sharing at home.

    Good solution would be to tunnel printing along with graphics and
    keyboard/mouse through X through ssh, so i print at office. But i have
    no such option, right?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2