Hi, Are there any IT departments in big companies which support desktop Linux and how they do it? The problem with official Linux support puzzles me. Two users told me quite recently they would like to run Linux on their PCs. Their knowledge is sufficient to use Linux but they will never administer the system. I had to recommend MS-Windows or MacOS instead since these systems are supported by their IT departments (In a large hospital and university network in this case.) These IT departments have developed sophisticated methods of MS-Windows support and are not willing to invest into Linux. I understand their reasons (Universities don't teach Linux so there is a lack of people with Linux administration skills, there is no "standard" Linux distribution, ...). I don't see any way how to change it and it worries me. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 22.34, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
understand their reasons (Universities don't teach Linux so there is a lack of people with Linux administration skills, there is no "standard" Linux distribution, ...).
1. Are you saying the universities teach administration in other operating systems? I thought details on that level was left up to the companies to train their staff with commercial courses. 2. There's the LSB which should sort that out. I think most distros adhere to that now. The relevant distros at least
Anders Johansson
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 22.34, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
understand their reasons (Universities don't teach Linux so there is a lack of people with Linux administration skills, there is no "standard" Linux distribution, ...).
1. Are you saying the universities teach administration in other operating systems?
No.
2. There's the LSB which should sort that out.
I don't think LSB says anything about "high level" administration tools which work the same way on SuSE, RedHat, ... but I may be wrong. Perhaps these tools already exist. Anyway, I'm not going to defend their reasons. I just want to know what the current situation with Linux support is so that I can apply some pressure on them. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Wednesday 20 November 2002 23.33, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
2. There's the LSB which should sort that out.
I don't think LSB says anything about "high level" administration tools which work the same way on SuSE, RedHat, ... but I may be wrong. Perhaps these tools already exist.
The LSB specifies the low level things, like which version of libc is included, and where the system scripts are stored. It should be enough to make a program written for one conforming distro to run on the others. That's the idea of the LSB, so as long as ISVs write "to the LSB" and not "to RedHat 8.0" or "to SuSE 8.1" the IT department should be able to install one program everywhere and be sure it works. As for the day-to-day admin tasks, webmin works for most distributions, and AFAIK it's being actively maintained, so it's fairly up to date. It looks the same for all the distros I've tried it on. But on the other hand, there are very few tools that work "the same way" for the various windows variants out there. Most IT departments that run windows specify one particular version that they support, say win2k, and if you want to run win98, NT4 or XP, if you're even allowed to do that, you're on your own. They could do that with linux too, pick one version and support that.
* Alexandr Malusek (Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se) [021120 14:34]: ->> 2. There's the LSB which should sort that out. -> ->I don't think LSB says anything about "high level" administration ->tools which work the same way on SuSE, RedHat, ... but I may be wrong. ->Perhaps these tools already exist. -> ->Anyway, I'm not going to defend their reasons. I just want to know ->what the current situation with Linux support is so that I can apply ->some pressure on them. A. The LSB doesn't have much to do with sys admin style or the tools that are used. Linux supports 90%+ of the standard Unix tools such as grep, awk, sed..etc...etc. So if one knows how to admin a Unix box then Linux is trivial to admin. I have 55 SuSE 8.1 boxes on desktops in my dept that are my responsiblity along with 4 large Solaris clusters. I don't have issues that I can't handle with either. If your talking about GUI tools that are frontends to what can be done via commandline then..yes...there are differences but GUI tools are point and click..they are easy to figure out. I firmly believe that if a system admin can't admin Linux/Unix boxes via commandline then they are not capable of doing the job and shouldn't be in the job. It's just the nature of the beast. As far as support is concerned. All one has to do is buy support from the vendor that sells the hardware/software..such as IBM, SuSE, RH or any of the 100's of companies that have put these programs in place. I also firmly believe that companies should invest in training their employee's to know WTF they are doing instead of counting on litigation to fix their problems. The old mindset of " If something goes wrong who do I sue.." goes out the window with OSS because it's cheaper to hire admins and developers who know WTF their doing and it's a lot more time efficient because problems get fixed quicker. That's the main problem with "paper mcse's"..they know what they were taught in those cert classes and nothing more in most cases. -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org Tell me what you believe.. I tell you what you should see.
Ben Rosenberg
I firmly believe that if a system admin can't admin Linux/Unix boxes via commandline then they are not capable of doing the job and shouldn't be in the job.
That's the reason why people who has administered MS-Windows via GUI for years refuse to do the same with Linux. Some of them are also decision makers and so they decide Linux will not be supported. IMHO routine PC administration is not a research project requiring highly skilled specialists and an easy to use GUI application supporting centralized administration could do the job (if it existed). I administer a Linux cluster and several desktops and servers but I have no time to administer other people's desktops and notebooks - it's not my job. So I try to find a way how people who have the time but lack the skills can do it.
As far as support is concerned. All one has to do is buy support from the vendor that sells the hardware/software..such as IBM, SuSE, RH or any of the 100's of companies that have put these programs in place.
There are different levels of user support. In the hospital network here we have also an application support via a hotline. I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.) -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Thursday 21 November 2002 10:30 am, Alexandr Malusek wrote: [...biiiiiiig snip...]
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.) Have a look at vnc :o) That allows a remote user to "take over" a users' desktop [iirc].
Alexandr Malusek wrote:
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.)
XFree86? -- Geoff Beaumont Geoff@stormhammer.com
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 09:23, Geoff Beaumont wrote:
Alexandr Malusek wrote:
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.)
XFree86?
YES! So many of the newer linux folks come from WinNT IT experiences so they do not know the old school Unix ways of doing things. NFS mounted home dirs combined with NIS (TCPwrappers please because of security issues with NIS) allow for roaming profiles and domain control. ssh combined with XFree86 allows me to remotely log into the users machine and diagnose their problems. Think out of the MS IT box and remember what the linux experience is based on, a Unix-like environment. If you think in these terms and do a little research then you find out most of the IT solutions you are looking for originated not in Redmond but in Unix shops first. -- Johnathan Bailes BAE Systems ESI "UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." - Doug Gwyn ---
Johnathan Bailes wrote:
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 09:23, Geoff Beaumont wrote:
XFree86?
YES!
So many of the newer linux folks come from WinNT IT experiences so they do not know the old school Unix ways of doing things. NFS mounted home dirs combined with NIS (TCPwrappers please because of security issues with NIS) allow for roaming profiles and domain control. ssh combined with XFree86 allows me to remotely log into the users machine and diagnose their problems.
Think out of the MS IT box and remember what the linux experience is based on, a Unix-like environment. If you think in these terms and do a little research then you find out most of the IT solutions you are looking for originated not in Redmond but in Unix shops first.
Unix thinking is slowly making it into the Windows world - all our Win2k servers now run Terminal services for remote administration. Some of them are even headless ;c) -- Geoff Beaumont Geoff@stormhammer.com
Johnathan Bailes
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 09:23, Geoff Beaumont wrote:
Alexandr Malusek wrote:
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.)
XFree86?
YES!
So many of the newer linux folks come from WinNT IT experiences so they do not know the old school Unix ways of doing things.
It's true, but the old Unix ways have become obsolete nowadays.
NFS mounted home dirs
Several days ago, I reported I couldn't get a higher transfer speed than several hundred KiB/s via NFS. (Solaris server, SuSE Linux 8.1, 100 Mbps network). No one on this list reported a higher transfer speed. One measurement on an MR scanner generates about 10 GiB of data and the present NFS implementation cannot handle them efficiently. Moreover, NFS is insecure and Secure NFS is not contained in Linux distributions. My knowledge about NFS is useless here, I have to search for workarounds.
combined with NIS (TCPwrappers please because of security issues with NIS)
NIS is insecure and inflexible. Even Sun is going to base its name services on LDAP.
ssh combined with XFree86 allows me to remotely log into the users machine and diagnose their problems.
Yes, ssh is extremely useful but it doesn't come from the old school Unix. Insecure rlogin, telnet, rcp, and rsh were the only commands in many commercial Unixes and perhaps still are. I was told Solaris 9 finally contained OpenSSH ...
Think out of the MS IT box and remember what the linux experience is based on, a Unix-like environment. If you think in these terms and do a little research then you find out most of the IT solutions you are looking for originated not in Redmond but in Unix shops first.
I'm not thinking about managing 20 Unix boxes by highly skilled professionals with PhD in computer science. I'm thinking about managing thousands of Linux desktops by IT people who are (1) not very skilled and (2) not interested in searching for new solutions. These people prefer simple to use GUI tools. I think if software industry doesn't give them these tools (nicely packaged and ready to use) then they won't administer and support Linux on desktops in their companies. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 11:29, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
NFS mounted home dirs
Several days ago, I reported I couldn't get a higher transfer speed than several hundred KiB/s via NFS. (Solaris server, SuSE Linux 8.1, 100 Mbps network). No one on this list reported a higher transfer speed. One measurement on an MR scanner generates about 10 GiB of data and the present NFS implementation cannot handle them efficiently. Moreover, NFS is insecure and Secure NFS is not contained in Linux distributions. My knowledge about NFS is useless here, I have to search for workarounds.
Do you get better output with a samba share alternative? I never tried remotely mounting a person's home dir through samba but do you reach the same sort of performance barrier and do you need the kind of high transfer rate on a person's home dir?
combined with NIS (TCPwrappers please because of security issues with NIS)
NIS is insecure and inflexible. Even Sun is going to base its name services on LDAP.
Insecure yes. For internal use (corporate behind firewalls and VPNS and such) with TCPwrappers enabled I have not seen a problem and I have used it for years now. For maintaining a central repository of user accounts and passwords it is quite flexible enough. However, in this instance, especially I can't blame you for going with LDAP. I simply did not mention because I do not have a great deal of experience with this.
ssh combined with XFree86 allows me to remotely log into the users machine and diagnose their problems.
Yes, ssh is extremely useful but it doesn't come from the old school Unix. Insecure rlogin, telnet, rcp, and rsh were the only commands in many commercial Unixes and perhaps still are. I was told Solaris 9 finally contained OpenSSH ...
ssh in commercial and openssh in open formats have been around awhile and they originated for Unix platforms to provide a method of secure shell access because of the problems with rlogin and other utilities so I consider it very Unix if not old school. Every linux distro I know of starts off with ssh enabled and telnet and other access methods turned off by default. Most of the commercial distros did not want to include openssh and did not want to spend the money for ssh. A couple of pkgadd commands later in Solaris and you have openssh. I keep a group of packages updated through a bit of automation that always get added to a Solaris box after install. The list is growing shorter and shorter now that Sun has started to include these tools by default but there are stil some out there.
Think out of the MS IT box and remember what the linux experience is based on, a Unix-like environment. If you think in these terms and do a little research then you find out most of the IT solutions you are looking for originated not in Redmond but in Unix shops first.
I'm not thinking about managing 20 Unix boxes by highly skilled professionals with PhD in computer science. I'm thinking about managing thousands of Linux desktops by IT people who are (1) not very skilled and (2) not interested in searching for new solutions. These people prefer simple to use GUI tools. I think if software industry doesn't give them these tools (nicely packaged and ready to use) then they won't administer and support Linux on desktops in their companies.
Well Yast2 includes tools for setting NFS server and NIS server right there in glorious GUI form right out of the box. There is also webmin which we use in house. There is SWAT for Samba setup which comes with almost all distros with samba server packages. There is a webmin module for LDAP and a tool for LDAP called GQ which is gtk based. BTW, if your IT department has no overwhelming need to move off of Windows to a *Nix style environment you are setting yourself for failure anyway. If the people supporting the systems have no interest in the systems and learning a new way of doing things they are not going to be happy or supportive of your project. The software industry can package all the nice gui tools they want and it will NOT matter. They know windows. Linux is not windows. They have no huge need or overwhelming reason to learn something outside of windows. They will not support linux. I remember the big move from Novell to NT 4.0 administration that happened for a lot of companies. The overwhelming reason for them was that the desktops ran windows, the NT servers ran windows, Novell borked the initial I think 4.0 release which had issues (I may be wrong on the version) and the IT departments needed something that worked. In my environment, our servers run Unix, our programmers worked inside of an Exceed session or a telnet window on a Windows box or even worse some of them had expensive unix workstations. It was backwards to say the least. We moved them to linux. Their home dirs are centrally located on a NFS share (no problems with throughput so far), their accounts are maintained through NIS and they hook up to existing corporate shares still on NT through LinNeighborhood or Komba. They love it and the sysadmins who support them since we dealt with Unix servers anyway love it. We had the overwhelming reason. The question is do you? -- Johnathan Bailes BAE Systems ESI "UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." - Doug Gwyn ---
Johnathan Bailes
Do you get better output with a samba share alternative?
I'll try it. Now, users can copy data via rcp to a local disk. The transfer speed is about 10 MB/s.
NIS is insecure and inflexible. Even Sun is going to base its name services on LDAP.
Insecure yes. For internal use (corporate behind firewalls and VPNS and such) with TCPwrappers enabled I have not seen a problem and I have used it for years now.
Anybody can list the content of the passwd map. In my case, "John the Ripper" (package john-*.rpm) decrypted several passwords in less than 2 seconds. In less then 2 days, I had about 75% of all passwords in the NIS domain (less than 100 users) decrypted. This was done to increase the LAN security; users were asked to change their decrypted passwords.
We had the overwhelming reason. The question is do you?
It's not about me. It's about people here who would like to run Linux on their desktops and notebooks to do research in physics but the IT refuses to provide any kind of Linux support. There are Unix and Linux boxes here administered by me and my colleagues but we are too busy doing physics to administer more machines. The only solution is to get the IT involved but they are MS-Windows people. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
* Alexandr Malusek
NFS mounted home dirs Several days ago, I reported I couldn't get a higher transfer speed than several hundred KiB/s via NFS. (Solaris server, SuSE Linux 8.1, 100 Mbps network). No one on this list reported a higher transfer speed.
I mainatin a mixed network, we have a solaris server that has all the homedirs (upto 10G of data per homedir) on a local disk, shared through NFS. A variety of linux clients (suse 7.2 /7.3 mainly, one or two redhat boxes and a laptop with 8.1) solaris clients and a couple of SGI boxes. Never had performance problems, but you have to tune the nfs server. For some odd reason solaris comes with a configuration where the nfsserver has only 16 threads. Up this to approx 200 threads per CPU (so if you have a dual CPU box, change the /etc/rc file to start /usr/../nfsd -a 400 (don't forget to up the lockd's number of threads as well).
One measurement on an MR scanner generates about 10 GiB of data and the present NFS implementation cannot handle them efficiently. Moreover, NFS is insecure and Secure NFS is not contained in Linux distributions. My knowledge about NFS is useless here, I have to search for workarounds.
Of course NFS is insecure, so you set up a firewall, and you trust those within, and do not allow those outside.
combined with NIS (TCPwrappers please because of security issues with NIS) NIS is insecure and inflexible. Even Sun is going to base its name services on LDAP.
But NIS is perfectly suited for maintaining a central user database. It's etup in a couple of minutes (there's an excellent step-by-step howto on how to set upo a (solaris) NIS server on docs.sun.com.
ssh combined with XFree86 allows me to remotely log into the users machine and diagnose their problems.
Yes, ssh is extremely useful but it doesn't come from the old school Unix. Insecure rlogin, telnet, rcp, and rsh were the only commands in many commercial Unixes and perhaps still are. I was told Solaris 9 finally contained OpenSSH ...
Sol 9 has ssh/sshd but the internet is your friend. precompiled binaries can be found for pretty much any OS. Google is your friend.
Think out of the MS IT box and remember what the linux experience is based on, a Unix-like environment. If you think in these terms and do a little research then you find out most of the IT solutions you are looking for originated not in Redmond but in Unix shops first.
I'm not thinking about managing 20 Unix boxes by highly skilled professionals with PhD in computer science. I'm thinking about managing thousands of Linux desktops by IT people who are (1) not very skilled and (2) not interested in searching for new solutions.
Forget it. If you have to manage thousands of dekstops, you have to spend the money to hire 1 good professional. If you do not have a good support staff for such a large number of boxes, It's simply not an option. (and in this case it doesn't matter whether you need to manage a 1000 linux boxes, a 1000 Cray computers, a 1000 Win95 boxes or a 1000 iMacs. With these numbers you need to have support staff/IT staff that *knows* the platform and that *knows* the tools. Currently listening to: Jimi Hendrix - Angel Gerhard, <@jasongeo.com> == The Acoustic Motorbiker == -- __O Some say the end is near. =`\<, Some say we'll see armageddon soon (=)/(=) I certainly hope we will I could use a vacation
Gerhard den Hollander
A variety of linux clients (suse 7.2 /7.3 mainly, one or two redhat boxes and a laptop with 8.1) solaris clients and a couple of SGI boxes.
Never had performance problems, but you have to tune the nfs server.
Could you try NFS server$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/user/10MiBfile bs=10240k count=1 NFS server$ touch /home/user/10MiBfile # before each client access NFS client$ time cat /home/user/10MiBfile > /dev/null on the 7.3 and 8.1 clients? In my case the transfer speed is 1.3 MiB/s for 7.3 and around 500 KiB/s on 8.1 (100 Mbps network). With a SuSE-7.2 client and SuSE-7.3 server the transfer speed is 11.1 MiB/s which is quite good.
But NIS is perfectly suited for maintaining a central user database.
IMHO NIS is obsolete but I don't have time to discuss it in details now.
I'm not thinking about managing 20 Unix boxes by highly skilled professionals with PhD in computer science. I'm thinking about managing thousands of Linux desktops by IT people who are (1) not very skilled and (2) not interested in searching for new solutions.
Forget it. If you have to manage thousands of dekstops, you have to spend the money to hire 1 good professional.
Good professionals are needed for new concepts, security, ... and they already work in IT departments of big companies. But these people don't replace failed hardware in remote locations, don't do new installations according to a pattern, don't install and configure user applications, don't provide user support, .... Lower paid technicians and people of similar expertise level do the routine work. What I'm trying to say is that there is a lack of "enterprise level" Linux administration tools for the later people. But, apparently, I can't do it a way that people understand. -- Alexandr.Malusek@imv.liu.se
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 16:46, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
What I'm trying to say is that there is a lack of "enterprise level" Linux administration tools for the later people. But, apparently, I can't do it a way that people understand.
The sarcasm is not needed. I listed out a laundry list of applications including Yast2 tools for NFS, and NIS, Webmin for well everything but it is one seperate install and it has a LDAP module since NIS is obsolete, GQ a GTK+ LDAP configuration tool, and SWAT for Samba administration which I believes comes with SuSE. There are plenty of nice gui admin tools for Linux and Unix in general, the best is webmin in my opinion but there are others. I am not sure what more you want. Webmin is a web-based easily configurable tool with modules for basically everything under the sun and it works for the support folks and entry-level admins. I have seen them use it. -- Johnathan Bailes BAE Systems ESI "UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." - Doug Gwyn ---
Well, in my experience most univesities teack unix to anyone that is getting a degree in computer engineering or comp sci. The computer information majors are the ones that learn windows. The field has various names but is essentially a hydrid degree mixing business ciriculum and a basics of system admin. I have to be honest that most people that get any degree in a dedicated comp sci/engineering above the bacholers degree are all taught and fairly well versed in Unix. Since Linux is an offset of Unix most qualified university grads should and usually do know how to run a Linux box. The problem is usually management and/or the CIO's. They are mostly business degreed and therefore have a myopic view of any product that isn't made or backed by a major corperate vendor. If you really talk to a wide variety of in the trenches sys admins that have more than just an MSCE cert (and therefore want to call themselves "engineers" - HA) they will probably tell you they run a Sun/UNIX or similair servers and Windows desktops. The problem I keep hearing (if you can get one away from work to be honest) is that the fear of no user apps and no internal management support. Consider most sigh M$ contracts and are essentially afraid of dealling with any conflict with the Beast. Cheers, Curtis On Wednesday 20 November 2002 15:34, Alexandr Malusek wrote:
Hi,
Are there any IT departments in big companies which support desktop Linux and how they do it?
The problem with official Linux support puzzles me. Two users told me quite recently they would like to run Linux on their PCs. Their knowledge is sufficient to use Linux but they will never administer the system. I had to recommend MS-Windows or MacOS instead since these systems are supported by their IT departments (In a large hospital and university network in this case.)
These IT departments have developed sophisticated methods of MS-Windows support and are not willing to invest into Linux. I understand their reasons (Universities don't teach Linux so there is a lack of people with Linux administration skills, there is no "standard" Linux distribution, ...). I don't see any way how to change it and it worries me.
-- Billboard Writer vs. Literature = Micorsoft vs. Computing,
Sorry Jon, but I think when you run a vnc server on a unix box it creates the VNC server on the next available display number - usually machine:1 for the first vnc server. Windoze boxes (other than citrix and 2K adv) only have one display so you do indeed control it if the vnc server host is on one of them Damian The Purple Tiger wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2002 10:30 am, Alexandr Malusek wrote: [...biiiiiiig snip...]
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.)
Have a look at vnc :o) That allows a remote user to "take over" a users' desktop [iirc].
-- Damian O'Hara using: SuSE Linux 8.0 11:14am up 51 days, 2:59, 22 users, load average: 0.34, 0.10, 0.07
On Thursday 21 November 2002 11:19 am, Damian Ohara wrote:
Sorry Jon, but I think when you run a vnc server on a unix box it creates the VNC server on the next available display number - usually machine:1 for the first vnc server.
Windoze boxes (other than citrix and 2K adv) only have one display so you do indeed control it if the vnc server host is on one of them
Damian Ahh right, thanks Damian :o) I have used it linux -> windows [with windows as the server] and made an assumption about the reverse being able to be true - how silly of me :grin:
You learn something new every day :o)
Sorry Jon, but I think when you run a vnc server on a unix box it creates the VNC server on the next available display number - usually machine:1 for the first vnc server.
Windoze boxes (other than citrix and 2K adv) only have one display so you do indeed control it if the vnc server host is on one of them
Damian From a different thread on the list [How do I export X desktop to remote Win2K machine ?] I noticed the following bit - I am not sure how relevant it is, but it could be a way forward..... I just glanced at
On Thursday 21 November 2002 11:19 am, Damian Ohara wrote: the pages and noticed "under heavy development" on the kde desktop sharing link - still, it might be good for future use :o)
-=- But that starts a new X session. You can export the existing session using x0rfbserver: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/extras.html#x0rfbserver and there is also KDE desktop sharing, which is based on this: http://www.tjansen.de/krfb/ -=-
On Thursday 21 November 2002 06:44, The Purple Tiger wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2002 11:19 am, Damian Ohara wrote:
Sorry Jon, but I think when you run a vnc server on a unix box it creates the VNC server on the next available display number - usually machine:1 for the first vnc server.
Windoze boxes (other than citrix and 2K adv) only have one display so you do indeed control it if the vnc server host is on one of them
Damian
From a different thread on the list [How do I export X desktop to remote Win2K machine ?] I noticed the following bit - I am not sure how relevant it is, but it could be a way forward..... I just glanced at the pages and noticed "under heavy development" on the kde desktop sharing link - still, it might be good for future use :o)
-=- But that starts a new X session. You can export the existing session using x0rfbserver:
http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/extras.html#x0rfbserver
and there is also KDE desktop sharing, which is based on this:
I have installed the kde destop sharing (krfb) at home. This is not a production environment, but it has been used heavily at times. It has not failed me, however it is very slow over the WAN (cable modem). Over the 100M network, it works like a champ. -- Kelly L. Fulks Home Account
krfb I'm using it without issues for a long time Oxiel El Jue 21 Nov 2002 07:19, Damian Ohara escribió:
Sorry Jon, but I think when you run a vnc server on a unix box it creates the VNC server on the next available display number - usually machine:1 for the first vnc server.
Windoze boxes (other than citrix and 2K adv) only have one display so you do indeed control it if the vnc server host is on one of them
Damian
The Purple Tiger wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2002 10:30 am, Alexandr Malusek wrote: [...biiiiiiig snip...]
I think the IT person can remotely control the users desktop to see where the problem is and how to fix it. (I don't know about any Linux tool which can do that.)
Have a look at vnc :o) That allows a remote user to "take over" a users' desktop [iirc].
_______________________________________________________________ Copa del Mundo de la FIFA 2002 El único lugar de Internet con vídeos de los 64 partidos. ¡Apúntante ya! en http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/fc/es/
That's one of the most motivating things about using Linux - the fabulous wealth of contributed software available and the commitment of people unafraid to use it. 'just going to check the vnc contrib site again now ;o) Damian Oxiel Contreras wrote:
krfb
I'm using it without issues for a long time
Oxiel
snip! -- Damian O'Hara using: SuSE Linux 8.0 1:33pm up 51 days, 5:18, 19 users, load average: 0.10, 0.28, 0.22
participants (11)
-
Alexandr Malusek -
Anders Johansson -
Ben Rosenberg -
Curtis Rey -
Damian Ohara -
Geoff Beaumont -
Gerhard den Hollander -
Johnathan Bailes -
Kelly L. Fulks -
Oxiel Contreras -
The Purple Tiger