Bug 86318 - krdc (vnc compoment) should support TightVNC extensions
Summary: krdc (vnc compoment) should support TightVNC extensions
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: krdc
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: Gentoo Packages Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: tim
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-07-30 23:49 UTC by Stefan Briesenick
Modified: 2004-07-31 23:17 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Stefan Briesenick 2004-07-30 23:49:32 UTC
Version:            (using KDE KDE 3.2.3)
Installed from:    Gentoo Packages
OS:                Linux

the vnc compoment should be extended to support the tightvnc extensions (http://tightvnc.org).

I like the vnc:// thingy and krdc is way better (integrated) than the thightvnc client. But thightvnc is way faster! local pointers, jpeg compression and other goodies makes tightvnc one of the best vnc implementations.

KDE should support these extensions!


Stefan
Comment 1 tim 2004-07-31 10:50:55 UTC
It already does - actually it is based on the tightvnc client. To enable JPEG compression, switch to medium or low quality.
Comment 2 Stefan Briesenick 2004-07-31 15:11:40 UTC
and what about local pointers? last time i've checked, the pointer wasn't local!
Comment 3 tim 2004-07-31 15:30:38 UTC
It tries to measure the latency of the pointer and only activates the local pointer if the latency becomes too large. In 3.3 it will be possible to activate it in the misc menu, because to latency detection does not always succeed :)
Comment 4 Stefan Briesenick 2004-07-31 23:17:07 UTC
ok, ok. ;-)

I missed all the settings of tightvnc (there're many of them!), so I thought, it's dumb plain old VNC. Most important to me are local pointers! It's the best performance boost, since only the movement/location has to be transmitted and not the shape itself (the shape only once). The latency of remote pointers is pure pain!

Oh, you should update the documentation and mention, that you're tightvnc compatible...