Hej Jarle,
I am not really a MAC expert - but I'd say if other X clients can connect through UNIX sockets, the x2goclient should be able to do that as well. When developing my python x2go library, I ran into pretty much the same issue with win32 - nxproxy didn't really want to use unix sockets in the cygwin environment. It might be that this is actually not a mac/cygwin problem, but that there is something wrong with nxproxy, which is the component that gets a compressed stream through SSH, builds a cache and plays back the uncompressed X11 messages to the local X server. Even though I cannot really help you, I have some ideas how you could track down the issue: You have probably heard of nomachine.com who actually invented the NX stuff. Go to their website and download their NX Client for Mac OS X and see if that needs you to open the TCP X11 port or not It's using nxproxy as well (maybe even exactly the same version/binary) - so the communication between X and the proxy follows the same scheme as x2go does. The NoMachine website has a "TestDrive" section that you can use to play around with - no need to setup an NX test server!
I hope that will get you a bit closer to the solution what's going wrong ;)
Good luck!
Jörg
Am Mittwoch, den 18.08.2010, 10:25 +0200 schrieb Jarle Bjørgeengen:
Hi,
first, thank you for a nice application. I've been looking for a
suitable free NX low-bandwidth solution and x2go seems to fit the
purpose well.I'm using the MAC client, and I'm a bit puzzled that it is necessary
to turn on remote connections (and hence open the X11 TCP port for
listening) in order to locally display the desktop received over NX
protocole (presumably tunneled over SSH) . So first you tunnel over
SSH for security, and then it is required to open a potentially
vulnerable service in order to display that picture ... ?When starting X programs (like XTERM) in OSX it seems that the default
behavior is to communicate over a internal unix socket. Would it be
possible to have x2goclient for mac using the same mechanism rather
requiring the opening of unsafe services ?