Triple VNC

[Cyrille Lefevre]

"Tom McLaughlin" <tmclaugh at sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 12:09, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> > "Tom McLaughlin" <tmclaugh at sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 17:04, Bruno Czekay wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > The first problem I see is you install the tightvnc package and it
> > > creates bin/vncviewer which is a symlink to bin/vncviewer-tight and then
> > > you install realvnc.  I believe that if you overwrite the existing
> > > symlink you will overwrite the symlink target.  So by installing
> > > realvnc's bin/vncviewer you will overwrite tightvnc's
> > > bin/vncviewer-tight.  I haven't tried this with any ports, simply
> > > copying files around and copying to the symlink overwrote the target
> > > file.
> > 
> > a well done package could easily handle this issue by first removing the
> > symlink and by installing its own one. a better way would be to install
> > all of them using a separate name and to have a separate startup script
> > for each of them w/ separate startup variables for the server side, and
> > to have a wrapper for the client side as for mozilla.
> > 
> > <snip>
> 
> Okay, would the wrapper script then be bin/vncviewer?  Which package

yes

> owns the script and what happens if the owner package is removed, how
> does that affect the other vnc versions installed?

as the mozilla (well, netscape) wrapper does, vnc-wrapper. so, there is
no problem whatever which vncviewer is installed. see, netscape-wrapper
for details.

> Personally I tend to be leery of anything fancy in ports to make them
> play nice with others.  That's my bias there.  Thanks.  :)


Cyrille Lefevre.
-- 
mailto:clefevre-lists at 9online.fr