VNC

[Tim Waugh]

On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:10:07PM -0500, Edward Muller wrote:

> Any reason why RealVNC 4.0b4 is included in Fedora instead of the
> current tightvnc, of which an older version was included in RHL 9?

RealVNC is better in a number of important respects:

1. It works on more architectures
2. It is built against a current XFree86 source tree and so is more
   maintainable
3. It provides vnc.so, for exporting a running display efficiently

While RealVNC lacks some of the encodings that TightVNC has, it also
provides ZRLE and colour peeling, which IMHO make up for that.

Tim.
*/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20031008/8e47cc13/attachment.sig>