Acutally, bug 78282 seems to be more like it in this case. However, thanks for the clue on that one. The bug you reference pointed to that one as a possible "duplicate" and that one had a solution I could actually use in the meantime. Use the TightVNC server instead.
Acutally, bug 78282 seems to be more like it in this case. However, thanks for the clue on that one. The bug you reference pointed to that one as a possible "duplicate" and that one had a solution I could actually use in the meantime. Use the TightVNC server instead.
--Ian.