News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Xpra: Screen for X. Parent comment

Re:Xpra: Screen for X by kcbanner on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @09:16AM (#7063421)
This is different. This is forwarding on the application level, not the entire screen.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by angerman on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @09:17AM (#7063423)
Isn't that what NX does as well?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by paol on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @10:18AM (#7063732)
Yes. If you're already using NX there's nothing to see here.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by joeyo on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @06:47PM (#7067076)
It may not matter to you, but xpra feels a lot more light-weight than NX. Installing/using xpra feels like tmux or ssh. NX feels like an enterprise software suite.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by dded on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @07:14PM (#7067183)
It definitely matters. I've always struggled with NX. VNC is easier, but slower.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by philsnow on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @03:11PM (#7065806)
NX has a "rootless" mode, and a "desktop" mode. xpra has only the "rootless" mode.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by amtota on Wednesday January 15, 2014 @10:38PM (#7067925)
That's just not true anymore. You can get a desktop mode by running Xephir inside xpra.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Xpra: Screen for X by philsnow on Wednesday January 22, 2014 @01:01AM (#7101041)
Bah now we're into semantics, but say you're running xpra on display :1. Running an Xnest or Xephyr inside that can't re-use the :1 display. Further, you can run multiple Xnests/Xephyrs inside an xpra session.

I stand by my statement that xpra has only a "rootless" mode, but I will agree that with Xephyr (which is a less-sucky Xnest), there is less of a difference anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]