Re: X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
Re: X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
- Subject: Re: X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 23:12:47 +0000
- Thread-topic: X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
All, Jeremy
This is pretty important for us in CSIRO too - we need remote opengl for
scientific visualization in very many domains. Doesn't need to be gaming level
& we don't expect that. If someone can write a 2-line HOWTO/summary of
how to re-enable this (eg any server/client settings) many of us would be grateful. I'm a bit mystified as to the
xorg committee decision too..
Cheers
James.
James Gunning
CSIRO
Clayton, Vic., Australia
________________________________________
From: x11-users-bounces+james.gunning=email@hidden <x11-users-bounces+james.gunning=email@hidden> on behalf of Langer, Steve <email@hidden>
Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2016 8:26 AM
To: email@hidden
Subject: Re: X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
Jeremy:
Why is it OK to send X11 2D graphics commands across the network using the
X11 protocol and a security risk to send OpenGL commands across the
network using the X11 protocol? If all the X11 protocol commands are
tunneled through ssh, that should make them safe while on the network. Is
the problem that the OpenGL on the Mac is insecure?
If OpenGL across the network if fast enough for what a users wants to do,
it seems irrelevant that local OpenGL would be faster.
It is possible to write an OpenGL program that runs on a server and stores
all the graphical elements in a scene in a display list that resides in
the memory of the desktop/laptop computer. When the user rotates the
scene, the program transmits a new transformation matrix and a "draw the
display list² command across the network. The performance is very nearly
as fast as if the program were running locally because the display list is
already local. This approach breaks down when the display list becomes too
large to fit in graphics memory, but my laptop has 2 GB of graphics memory
and that is big enough to fit a pretty complicated scene.
A number of us don¹t understand why xorg decided to take GLX away without
providing any cross network replacement. In effect, xorg is saying ³You
should rewrite all of your GLX programs and invent your own network
protocol to transfer the OpenGL commands across the network². That sounds
like a lot of work. Without a rationale that I can understand, it sounds
like xorg is doing this because they can.
Can you offer any insight into xorg¹s thinking on this topic?
Thanks,
Steve Langer
On 5/18/16, 12:00 PM, "x11-users-bounces+langer1=email@hidden
on behalf of email@hidden"
<x11-users-bounces+langer1=email@hidden on behalf of
email@hidden> wrote:
>Send X11-users mailing list submissions to
> email@hidden
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/x11-users
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> email@hidden
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> email@hidden
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of X11-users digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: XQuartz 2.7.9 Update Inquiry (Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 09:55:12 -0700
>From: Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <email@hidden>
>To: Rich Cook <email@hidden>
>Cc: email@hidden
>Subject: Re: XQuartz 2.7.9 Update Inquiry
>Message-ID: <email@hidden>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>> On May 18, 2016, at 07:31, Rich Cook <email@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> IGLX is dead?
>
>It is disabled by default these days in Xorg:
>
>commit d0da0e9c3bb8fe0cd4879ecb24d21715bfaa209b
>Author: Eric Anholt <email@hidden>
>Date: Thu Sep 4 10:59:40 2014 -0700
>
> glx: Disable indirect GLX contexts by default.
>
> Almost every situation of someone running indirect GLX is a mistake
> that results in X Server crashes. Indirect GLX is the cause of
> regular security vulnerabilities, and rarely provides any capability
> to the user. Just disable it unless someone wants to enable it for
> their special use case (using +iglx on the command line).
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt <email@hidden>
> Acked-by: Keith Packard <email@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Packard <email@hidden>
>
>> I think you are going to find a lot of people to be very shocked by
>>that statement. Something really has to replace it, and something
>>definitely will, because many many users are using IGLX right now. Not
>>everyone using OpenGL is playing games and looking for fast refresh
>>rates. Scientists at the national laboratories and other research
>>facilities are using IGLX every day to get their work done.
>>
>> There are lots of applications that draw with OpenGL, such as plotting
>>software for scientific applications like TecPlot or IDL, lots of
>>engineering software, etc, where scientists need to display their data
>>on a remote cluster back to their desktop. It's highly inconvenient to
>>shuttle their data back to the desktop. Other applications draw things
>>like buttons and other GUI elements with OpenGL. IGLX is not as fast as
>>direct mode GL, but software rendering is incredibly slow, often by 10X
>>or more, because of the incredibly inefficient asynchronous X11
>>rendering nightmare.
>>
>> My guess is that if IGLX goes away, people will switch to RealVNC or
>>TurboGL, which are VNC technologies that support OpenGL in hardware and
>>then copy pixels around. These solutions require users to spin up
>>their own X11 server, which is a pretty heavy weight solution, but it's
>>how we do it where I work when necessary.
>>
>>
>>> On May 17, 2016, at 11:16 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia
>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 17, 2016, at 22:42, Rich Cook <email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, what is going to replace IGLX?
>>>
>>> Nothing. It's been pretty much dead for years.
>>>
>>>> How are people going to display OpenGL graphics over remote X11 if
>>>>not by GLX? Sorry if this is offtopic.
>>>
>>> They're not. It's not efficient. You can use software rendering if
>>>you need to.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On May 17, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia
>>>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 17, 2016, at 22:18, Richard Cook <email@hidden>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know what IGLX is, but GLX did not seem to work for me at
>>>>>>all when I tried it in 2.7.9. Specifically, I could not run
>>>>>>glxgears on a remote linux box, which is the canonical GLX test I
>>>>>>always use.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is IGLX.
>>>>>
>>>>>> But the good news it that switching back to 2.7.8 was painless and
>>>>>>made my problems with 2.7.9 go away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 17, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia
>>>>>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FWIW, there are security vulnerabilities addressed in the versions
>>>>>>>of libpng in 2.7.9, so you might want to update at least for the
>>>>>>>security reasons.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only issues that I'm aware of as regressions are the issues
>>>>>>>with IGLX (which isn't really going to be supported much longer)
>>>>>>>and a regression in the support for tcp connections (which is off
>>>>>>>by default and discouraged).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Jeremy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On May 17, 2016, at 14:39, Christopher Fick
>>>>>>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Magda, thank you so much for your thoughts! I did notice that
>>>>>>>>v2.7.9 was just released earlier this month, and bugs were one
>>>>>>>>thing I wondered about. I'm pretty out of the loop on this stuff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, no I don't think I have anything to gain from an upgrade.
>>>>>>>>Nothing prompted me to look into an upgrade aside from curiosity
>>>>>>>>and an attempt to stay up to date. I just use XQ to run Inkscape,
>>>>>>>>and so far I haven't had any issues in the little I've used it. It
>>>>>>>>also appears that Inkscape is still standing at the same version
>>>>>>>>(0.91) as when I initially installed it with XQ So, I will take
>>>>>>>>your advice. If it ain't broken...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Christopher
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Magda Tsintou
>>>>>>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Note: Sorry forgot to reply to all so that everyone can keep
>>>>>>>>track of the conversation...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Christopher,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With your OSX you would certainly not need to update. We recently
>>>>>>>>were discussing some bugs in XQ 2.7.9 that have not been resolved
>>>>>>>>while the version 2.7.8 works perfectly fine and I am running El
>>>>>>>>Capitan 10.11.5. XQ 2.7.9 did not allow me to work with certain
>>>>>>>>commands that needed forwarding over ssh and given the limited
>>>>>>>>people who have been working on that fix this may cause problems
>>>>>>>>for some time. I would strongly recommend from my personal
>>>>>>>>experience to stick with XQ 2.7.8 if you have nothing in
>>>>>>>>particular to gain from upgrading. I hope this helps a bit. Good
>>>>>>>>luck!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Magda.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Christopher Fick
>>>>>>>><email@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi I'm running XQ 2.7.8, and I see that 2.7.9 is now available.
>>>>>>>>If I check for updates through the XQ "app" it says I'm up to date
>>>>>>>>with 2.7.8.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, if I manually download and install 2.7.9 from the website
>>>>>>>>should I just install it over the previous version?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And on a side note, should I be able to update through 2.7.8, or
>>>>>>>>is it common knowledge that it doesn't work that way since this is
>>>>>>>>more of a framework (for lack of better words) rather than a
>>>>>>>>normal application.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Macbook Pro Mid 2012 15"
>>>>>>>> OSX 10.8.5
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Christopher
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>>>>>> X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
>>>>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>>>>>>mail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>>>>>> X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
>>>>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>>>>>>sktop.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>>>>>> X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
>>>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>>>>>l.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ‹‹‹‹‹
>>>> Cheers from Rich Cook
>>>> ===============================
>>>> Success is the ability to go from one failure to the next with no
>>>>loss of enthusiasm. --Winston Churchill
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> ‹‹‹‹‹
>> Cheers from Rich Cook
>> ===============================
>> Success is the ability to go from one failure to the next with no loss
>>of enthusiasm. --Winston Churchill
>>
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: smime.p7s
>Type: application/pkcs7-signature
>Size: 4465 bytes
>Desc: not available
>URL:
><http://lists.apple.com/archives/x11-users/attachments/20160518/a035707b/a
>ttachment-0001.p7s>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>X11-users mailing list
>email@hidden
>https://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/x11-users
>
>End of X11-users Digest, Vol 13, Issue 37
>*****************************************
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden