Prev: How do clear/wipe all previous lines on a terminal window?
Next: relative sizes of user-bases of CentOS versus ScientificLinux
From: Chris Davies on 27 Jan 2010 15:38
Todd <todd(a)invalid.com> wrote:
> I am confused. When running "X" windows, is the
> terminology reversed?

That depends on what you thought it was in the first place.


> [...] is the computer hosting the applications called the client and
> the remote computer viewing the applications called the server?

Yes.


> If so, why is this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System, especially the third
paragraph.

Chris
From: J G Miller on 27 Jan 2010 16:20
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:55:21 +0000, Stan Bischof wrote:

> X reverses this paradigm, hence is "backward".

In the most usual scenario of usage it does at first appear to be the
case.

But one can just as easily run a client on the local machine and
display its output on the screen of a remote machine.

Or even have the output of remote client display its output on
a different remote machine's display.

> Obviously ( as I attempted to state above ) once one understands how X
> works it makes perfect sense.

Agreed.

One needs to think in terms of X (display) server and X (program) client,
and the critical question is to which display is the user's DISPLAY
or -display flag set.
From: Greg Russell on 27 Jan 2010 16:51
In news:4b609da8$0$1657$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net,
Stan Bischof <stan(a)newserve.worldbadminton.com> typed:

>> I am confused. When running "X" windows, is the
>> terminology reversed? By chance is the computer
>> hosting the applications called the client and
>> the remote computer viewing the applications called
>> the server? Is so, why is this?
>
> yes- it is backwards

No it's not, your thinking is what's backwards. The X display server is
serving the display to the clients that need one.


From: Greg Russell on 27 Jan 2010 16:58
In news:4b60a839$0$1633$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net,
Stan Bischof <stan(a)newserve.worldbadminton.com> typed:

> I don't want to get into semantics, but virtually all
> computer users even back in the old Unix workstation
> days would tell you that the "client" is what
> you are sitting at and the "server" is the big hunk
> off in the computer room. X reverses this
> paradigm, hence is "backward".

I've been using X since the latter 1980's and have never subscribed to your
false logic regarding the X display server. It's serving the display to any
number of clients that need one, and those clients can be located anywhere
in the world, not just in the computer room.


From: Aragorn on 27 Jan 2010 17:14
On Wednesday 27 January 2010 20:33 in comp.os.linux.misc, somebody
identifying as Todd wrote...

> I am confused. When running "X" windows, [...

Not "X Windows" but "the X Window System". :-)

> ...] is the terminology reversed?

Yes it is. :-) But there is a logic to that - see farther down. :-)

> By chance is the computer hosting the applications called the client
> and the remote computer viewing the applications called
> the server? Is so, why is this?

It's not the computer hosting the applications which is called "the
client", but the applications themselves.

Let's assume the following scenario... You are sitting at a UNIX
workstation, with X running. You want to connect to a remote machine,
which has X applications installed which you do not have available on
your local workstation. So you decide to log into that remote server -
yes, now it is still "the server" :p - and forward its applications to
your local terminal.

As such, the remote server is forwarding the output of applications
which are running on that machine to your local X server. As such,
your local X server *is* *indeed* "the server", and the remote
applications are the clients, because they require your local X server
to generate screen output to you. ;-)

--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: How do clear/wipe all previous lines on a terminal window?
Next: relative sizes of user-bases of CentOS versus ScientificLinux