Re: X11 forwarding breaks with 2.7.3_rc2
Re: X11 forwarding breaks with 2.7.3_rc2
- Subject: Re: X11 forwarding breaks with 2.7.3_rc2
- From: Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:42:01 -0700
On Aug 24, 2012, at 09:20, "Cook, Rich" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Aug 23, 2012, at 10:31 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 23, 2012, at 20:00, "Cook, Rich" <email@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> I tried to display and it failed. Any hints or suggestion?
>>>
>>> cook47@rcmac (~): echo $DISPLAY
>>> /tmp/launch-QOJyhr/org.macosforge.xquartz:0 # I hate this weirdness on OS X
>>
>> Why do you hate it? It's a socket. I don't see what's to hate.
>
> It's not the socket-ness of it, it's the naming convention that seems to break tools that expect more "normal" naming schemes. For example, I recall xemacs had a weird bug that caused it to hang and it was due to expecting something "sane" (?) as a DISPLAY.
I think you're mistaken. xemacs just uses libX11 to connect to the server, and libX11 has supported this convention for 5+ years.
> Traditionally, I thought DISPLAY was an optionally hostname-colon pair, then an integer representing a port followed by a dot and a device number.
Close, but not exactly.
> Is a filename really kosher here?
Yes. It has been supported for 5+ years.
> Anyhow, I don't want to get into a religious argument, and I'm not the authority on "normality" and "saneness;" I just thought here's Apple doing something "better" that's actually just massively weird and causes problems. :-)
If you actually find a problem, please report it ... but I really don't believe that the problems you are having are being caused by the launchd socket.
The only thing that doesn't support the notation it is xauth, but it doesn't actually need to because the launchd sockets don't use xauth.
--Jeremy
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden