Arch Linux

gwpl

Member

From: Warsaw, Poland

Registered: 2010-07-10

Posts: 37

[Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

[Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

According to the upstream maintainer's recent statement in https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk-vnc/ … te_2327799 ,
gtk-vnc AKA gvncviewer is not intended to be a real-world supported client app but rather demo-ware showing how to use the API from C[1].

Currently, gtk-vnc is packaged in the community repository which may mislead users into thinking it's a fully supported VNC client.

Since Arch Linux guidelines discourage packaging demo/example applications in the official repositories, I suggest either:

1. Moving gtk-vnc to AUR
2. Renaming it to gtk-vnc-demo-example to clearly indicate its demo status

This would help prevent confusion for users seeking a proper VNC client solution. Alternative full-featured VNC clients like TigerVNC are available in the official repositories[4].

Would appreciate maintainers' thoughts on the appropriate course of action.

Citations:
[1] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=194224
[2] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=277084
[3] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=288677
[4] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=258937

Shamelessly generated with: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/in-whi … 9MgYtGDR5A

gtk-vnc maintainer Quote From https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk-vnc/ … te_2327799 :

Daniel P. Berrange
@dberrange
· 42 minutes ago
Maintainer
gvncviewer isn't a real world supported client app, it is just demo-ware showing how to use the API from C. As such it isn't intended to be a feature-rich client, and thus adding this functionality is out of scope.
(...)
Daniel P. Berrange
Daniel P. Berrange
@dberrange
· 32 minutes ago
Maintainer
IMHO this is a mistake in the Archlinux packaging decisions. It is already located in the 'examples' directory, and further more the build system sets it to NOT be installed when running 'ninja install'. Archlinux must have made a decision to install it manually, contrary to the upstream build rules.

Lone_Wolf

Administrator

From: Netherlands, Europe

Registered: 2005-10-04

Posts: 13,408

Re: [Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/gtk(2d)vnc doesn't mention that, also the readme at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk-vnc doesn't .

The archlinux PKGBUILD does install gvncviewer to /usr/bin .

Please file a bug report at https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … es/gtk-vnc

---

Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.

clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky

gwpl

Member

From: Warsaw, Poland

Registered: 2010-07-10

Posts: 37

Re: [Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

Please file a bug report at https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … es/gtk-vnc

> GitLab Enterprise Edition
> Due to an influx of spam, we have had to temporarily disable account registrations. Please write an email to accountsupport@archlinux.org, with your desired username, if
> you want to get access. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Can someone post who has account, thank you!

Last edited by gwpl (2025-01-22 15:06:12)

gromit

Package Maintainer (PM)

From: Germany

Registered: 2024-02-10

Posts: 1,027

Website

Re: [Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

You can just send a quick mail as described and then you'll get an account.

Lone_Wolf

Administrator

From: Netherlands, Europe

Registered: 2005-10-04

Posts: 13,408

Re: [Request] Consider removing gtk-vnc from community or marking as demo

Please write an email to accountsupport@archlinux.org, with your desired username

If you do, expect an answer within a few hours.

Bug reports work best if the creator has interest in solving the issue.
You have to be very lucky to find someone who is interested in gtk-vnc and has an account on archlinux.

---

Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.

clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky