[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Why the switch from TightVNC to RealVNC?



On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 08:18:37PM -0600, Steve Bergman wrote:

> I'm interested to know what the reasons were for switching from TightVNC
> to RealVNC.  I know that earlier versions of RedHat/Fedora Linux used
> TightVNC, but now RealVNC seems to have replaced it.

The original VNC is X-based, that is to say you need an X tree to
build it inside.  In Fedora Core 3 we ship RealVNC built against
xorg-x11-6.8.1.  If a security problem is discovered in xorg-x11, and
that problem affects the VNC modules built against it, it is a simple
matter to apply the patch and rebuild the VNC package.  The xorg-x11
project is actively maintained.

The TightVNC project, on the other hand, is still based on XFree86
3.3.x (not even 4.x).  As I understand it, there *are* security
problems in that release, they remain unfixed, and will continue to
remain unfixed.  XFree86 3.3.x is not undergoing any maintenance.

So it's a simple choice really.

I spoke to the TightVNC maintainer a while ago asking when he would
port to a newer X base, and he said it was on his to-do list -- but
until that happens, we can't really ship such an old version of the X
code that it builds against.

Tim.
*/

Attachment: pgp00335.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]