Bug 1910017 - vncserver split out?
Summary: vncserver split out?
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: tigervnc
Version: 34
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jan Grulich
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-12-22 10:29 UTC by david08741
Modified: 2021-06-24 16:52 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: tigervnc-1.11.0-12.fc34
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-06-24 16:52:25 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description david08741 2020-12-22 10:29:19 UTC
I have read the other bugs about the missing vncserver (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879739, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1882295, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1883027) but I think one issue that hasn't been mentioned, is that starting via systemd requires root permissions, which I do not have.

I just wanted to ask whether I got this right:
/usr/bin/vncserver is about to be dropped, but is still working.

If you do not want to maintain this, should this be split out into its own package?

Are there good reasons to drop this executable?

Comment 1 Jan Grulich 2021-01-05 09:01:22 UTC
The reason is that it is not supported upstream anymore. I will keep it probably as part of tigervnc until there are issues for which I won't have time to fix them. I don't also think it should be a separate package as it's easier for me to maintain it there.

Comment 2 david08741 2021-06-16 11:24:50 UTC
I am confused.

You say it is easier for you to maintain, but then you just break it.

I can understand to not be bother about it, but systemd is just not an option for me.

Would you be willing - now that you dropped support - to remove the file so that I can provide a separate package that just provides the wrapper?

Comment 3 Jan Grulich 2021-06-16 11:33:03 UTC
(In reply to david08741 from comment #2)
> I am confused.
> 
> You say it is easier for you to maintain, but then you just break it.
> 
> I can understand to not be bother about it, but systemd is just not an
> option for me.
> 
> Would you be willing - now that you dropped support - to remove the file so
> that I can provide a separate package that just provides the wrapper?

I'm sorry, I somehow missed to drop the condition enabling it on F34+. A new build is on the way bringing it back as it was not really intentional. Thank you for letting me know.

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2021-06-16 11:55:11 UTC
FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2021-06-17 01:29:49 UTC
FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2021-06-24 16:52:25 UTC
FEDORA-2021-b0e56093c3 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.