Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/18/2010 08:52 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/18/2010 07:51 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
Corentin Chary wrote:
> According to http://tigervnc.org/cgi-bin/rfbproto#zlib-encoding
> zlib encoding onl
On 05/18/2010 08:56 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
So patch 4 is invalid?
Technically, yes although I'm not sure that it would necessarily break a
client (since the client's request of compression levels is really just
advisory).
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Alex
On 05/18/2010 08:52 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 05/18/2010 07:51 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Corentin Chary wrote:
According to http://tigervnc.org/cgi-bin/rfbproto#zlib-encoding
zlib encoding only uses a single stream. Current implementation defines
4
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 05/18/2010 07:51 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Corentin Chary wrote:
>>
>>> According to http://tigervnc.org/cgi-bin/rfbproto#zlib-encoding
>>> zlib encoding only uses a single stream. Current implementation defines
>>> 4 streams but only uses the first one. Remove the
On 05/18/2010 07:51 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Corentin Chary wrote:
According to http://tigervnc.org/cgi-bin/rfbproto#zlib-encoding
zlib encoding only uses a single stream. Current implementation defines
4 streams but only uses the first one. Remove them and only use a single
stream.
Corentin Chary wrote:
> According to http://tigervnc.org/cgi-bin/rfbproto#zlib-encoding
> zlib encoding only uses a single stream. Current implementation defines
> 4 streams but only uses the first one. Remove them and only use a single
> stream.
>
How about when we start to implement zrle or z
