[Xcb] missing xdmcp in the wiki dev page

[Barton C Massey]

I want it; I still run into old X terminals once in a while.
If I can find a copy of my sources, which I think is not
impossible, I'll throw them back in and remove this
dependency.

Note that without XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1, there's no real way
to host one machine from another.  This capability is
occasionally useful even outside the X terminal setting, for
example if you want to be able to log directly into your
desktop box from your laptop screen, or vice-versa.

I also am doubtful that anyone's using an auth protocol
other than MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 or XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1.  But
it seemed at least worth asking.

    Bart

In message <20060506200149.GH4240 at id.minilop.net> you wrote:
> On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 10:00:26AM -0700, Barton C Massey wrote:
> > Oh.  I'm not sure that lib/Xdmcp should even be optional,
> > then, for now?  XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1 is pretty important.
> 
> You're the only person who has ever mentioned it to me, and Google
> considers your post announcing xcb_des.c to be one of the top
> authorities on XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1. :-) I haven't seen any evidence that
> it's worth spending any developer time on right now.
> 
> > How the heck did we lose my bits?  I'll try to find them,
> > and if not I'll recreate them.  They weren't hard IIRC.
> 
> When we discovered that it wasn't clear whether we could ship a DES
> implementation from inside the US, I moved xcb_des.[ch],v out of the CVS
> repository and into my home directory on freedesktop.org. Sometime in
> the intervening 2.5 years, those files disappeared. fd.o admins haven't
> made any efforts to preserve user files. :-/
> 
> I would like to discourage you from recreating those files right now
> though. As I say, I don't think it's worth spending any time on at the
> moment, and people who want this are taken care of.
> 
> > Are we doing anything other than XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1 and
> > MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 yet?  [he asks, being too lazy to look]
> 
> Nope.
> 
> > If not, does anyone actually care?
> 
> I have this theory... :-)
> 
> --Jamey