ned@nedscape.com (Ned Lilly) writes:
> Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> My question would be whether or not it's "batchable" for environments
>> where you haven't got X running or available.
>>
>> It could be nifty to "drag and drool" some reports into place, but
>> there are cases where that's only useful if they can subsequently be
>> deployed without needing to have either Qt or X available.
>
>
> Yeah, currently, the Qt library requires X to be running. We have
> some hope that this won't be the case with Qt4, now in beta.
> Haven't had much time to play with that yet...
>
> In our OpenMFG ERP product, what we currently do for our Batch
> Manager application running reports in a way like you're describing
> is to run it in a VNC server session. Would that be an option for
> you?
Hmm.
Not on a headless server where the nearest available screen is 900
miles away, and where it's entirely possible that running "remote X"
would be considered an attempt at a network exploit...
And considering that I'd be forced to install, from sources, in some
user area, such nonsalutory things as Qt, and to do that, some sort of
C++ "standard library" set, methinks this fits into the category of
"that might be cool for someone else."
Reporting infrastructure that requires a GUI to operate seems "broken
by design" for server use...
--
(format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org")
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #78. "I will not tell my Legions of Terror
"And he must be taken alive!" The command will be: ``And try to take
him alive if it is reasonably practical.''"
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
