RustDesk (FOSS easy to use TeamViewer alternative) has experimental Wayland support that needs testing!
RustDesk (FOSS easy to use TeamViewer alternative) has experimental Wayland support that needs testing!
Current prerelease is 1.2.5
1.2.4 is the first to introduce experimental Wayland support. Especially on KDE Plasma there are supposed to be some issues.
Lets test!
Why?
Regular RDP/VNC programs are hard to use in real scenarios, as they rely on IP addresses. RustDesk is easier as it uses a Rendezvouz server that can also be selfhostet or reimplemented.
You're viewing a single thread.
RustDesk is really good but I can't get certain decisions / limitations they have. For absolutely no reason, this, only seems to work under Windows... or are they trying to push people into the Pro Server / build your own which will ultimately require you to buy a license for their software (okay reasonable) AND developer accounts so you can sign macOS binaries (not okay).
They also document scripts to bootstrap clients on other OSses. And I don't think you need Pro to build rustdesk yourself - they even document the process.
To be fair, the APGL requires to publish code that is compilable. So giving instructions is pretty relevant for more complex projects.
They don't define what 'compilable' means though (among many other things), and it's pretty easy to come up with several different definitions of it that not everyone will agree with.
The one big thing they do hide behind Pro though, is authentication for the server side. With the free version, if your server is open to the internet, then anyone who knows the IP can use it to relay their clients as well.
They still need to know the key. If you publicly distribute your config, that's a problem. But IMO one even the pro version couldn't solve.
The point is that under Windows you can change the App name to set credentials and other settings like this:
rustdesk-host=mydomain.tld,key=eiu5pzFYlr5nY9i9yJp9smzzLnvx4XNX7O3SaNhkWS8=.exeBut under macOS you can't do it... just because they don't want to.
The apps are bundled completely differently on OSX and Linux. It's technically not possible to do the same thing there. Also this is not a free/paid limitation at all.
They could maybe build a packaging tool that can customize the binaries (adding data to the PE executable in Windows and maybe a property file in OSX and Linux); but that's quite some effort for not much gain.
Under macOS it’s trivial to change the name of the application package without messing with other aspects of the packaging.
If it's so easy to implement, go ahead and open a PR. The community will be thankful.
Qt actually ships platform tools that modify binaries to change the library search paths.
I said it's possible, just much more effort than the current solution which only requires reading and and parsing the process name on startup.