On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 05:57:18PM +0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
Hi On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 5:48 PM Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Sun, Mar 16, 2025 at 12:18:21PM +0400, marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx> > >Hi, > >This patch series offers an out-of-process Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) >server solution utilizing QEMU's -display dbus interface, offering improved >modularity and potential security benefits compared to built-in server. > >This initiative was spearheaded by Mihnea Buzatu during the QEMU Summer of Code >2023. The project's goal was to develop an out-of-process RDP server using the >-display dbus interface, implemented in Rust. Given that the IronRDP crate >lacked some server support at the time, investments in IronRDP were required. > >I finally released an initial v0.1 version of qemu-rdp on crates.io >(https://crates.io/crates/qemu-rdp). That should allow more people to review and >evaluate the state of this work. > My r-b still stands, I believe this can go in, the issue I faced is clearly only on my side and I'll get to it later. >On unix systems, with cargo/rust toolchain installed, it should be as easy as >running "cargo install qemu-rdp", apply this patch series for libvirt, set the >"rdp_tls_x509_cert_dir" location for your TLS certificates, and configure a VM >with both dbus & rdp graphics (run "virsh domdisplay DOMAIN" to get the display >connection details). > The only other issue I have currently is that "cargo install qemu-rdp" breaks due to some ironrdp stuff on clean fedora 41 install, but again, that's orthogonal to this patch being in libvirt.Fwiw, I am trying to package it for fc43. But I compile it daily on fc41 fine. Would be interested to know what fails. If you build from the git repos, it is likely that deps break every now and then though, there is no CI yet.
I'll let you know off-list.
Do you still have the commit rights or should I push this for you? I see that all your patches that are newer than roughly 10 years are merged by someone else =)Oh, I don't even remember having commit rights! Thus it's probably better if someone more familiar with the current process does it. I agree, it's ok to go too, we can solve additional/remaining issues on top and avoid some rebase pain that way. thanks!
done, you're welcome
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
