The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 10, 2013 8:19 UTC (Mon) by dgm (subscriber, #49227)
In reply to: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix) by Russ.Dill@gmail.com
Parent article: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

A typical novice mistake. Everyone worth it's bits knows that The Right Way(TM) to do it is run X over Emacs.

(Log in to post comments)

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 10, 2013 15:04 UTC (Mon) by dakas (guest, #88146) [Link]

Everyone worth it's bits knows that The Right Way(TM) to do it is run X over Emacs.

No, the right way is to use a shell connection (not X) into the machine in question and have it transparently shuffle the files into your local copy of Emacs.

For example, if you do C-x C-f /ssh:frodo@barad-dur.mordor.xxx:/mnt/doom RET then you'll get secure access to /mnt/doom as user frodo on host barad-dur.mordor.xxx without ever having to leave your local copy of Emacs.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 10, 2013 16:47 UTC (Mon) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

It was really foolish to allow anyone else write access to /mnt/doom. He really needed a better sysadmin.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 10, 2013 23:58 UTC (Mon) by ssmith32 (guest, #72404) [Link]

lol. Just finished up a re-read of the trilogy. Thanks for the chuckle :)

Take care,
-stu

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 11, 2013 3:06 UTC (Tue) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link]

TRAMP is great, but not always the best solution. At work I have a monster system. At home I have a mediocre system. I want to do compiling, debugging, etc. on my monster system--from within Emacs obviously. Also, I don't want to have to recreate my entire Emacs session at home: I can use emacsclient to bring up a remote frame in my at-work Emacs session, displayed on my system at home, and have all my buffers etc., even unsaved work, right there.

Distributed file access is important, but it's not the only thing.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 11, 2013 5:49 UTC (Tue) by oldtomas (guest, #72579) [Link]

By default, these days TRAMP tries to start processes on the box the current buffer comes from. See https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/tramp.... Invoking M-x shell "from within" a tramp buffer will bring you a shell on the remote box, and invoking M-x compile will try to run the compile command there too (Emacs 23.4.1 as it comes with Debian, so nothing too recent here).

So it'd be worth to give that a try. That said, there are doubtlessly advantages to the remote X setup, which I do appreciate in other occassions.

For your case (keeping the session alive), Emacs server might be an option too.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 18, 2013 11:09 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Uh... unless you use TTYs exclusively, the Emacs server *relies* on remote X to pop up a frame on the screen in front of you rather than wherever it was started. It's not an alternative to remote X: it *is* remote X, just a rather more unusual variant in which one program can be connected to multiple X "Display"s simultaneously.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 20, 2013 18:28 UTC (Thu) by daglwn (guest, #65432) [Link]

My emacs 24 doesn't pop up frames when using TRAMP to invoke shells.

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 25, 2013 20:57 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Aaah. Sorry, I completely misread it and had everything turned around. You're right, of course. (And that's a nifty feature: how long's it been there, I wonder...)