Connecting to Ubuntu Linux using VNC only gives 640x480 resolution

> you might start by editing /etc/vnc.conf and set "$geometry = 1024x768", then restart things and see what gives.
I actually tried something like this, also on Breezy: i have my screen connected at 1024x768 and changed $geometry to "640x480 in vnc.conf... No change..

> So for your theory to work hfern, gtomsho would need log in blind (without a screen attached)...
I actually logged out and guess what: there is no way how you can log into the system over vnc using vino. You indeed need to log in first on thje console and only then will vino let yousetup a connection Again, this is different then vncserver which defines a virtual X-terminal for you to log into.
I tried the blind login with my screen disconnected: on my system it still provides a 1024x768 screen over vino. This could be hardware related though, like Gns mentioned: 'Assuming the graphics adapter "wants to play" in such a setup'.

I'd be interested to learn what gtomsho's testing with the monitor stilll in place will yield.
Also, if gtomso reallly wants to leave the system without screen than this vino desktop sharing may not be the best solution. I would recommend a vncserver setup. This will give you all the flexibility to access the system remotely. Alternatively, connecting with an X-Terminal software package may be on option.

>> you might start by editing /etc/vnc.conf and set "$geometry = 1024x768", then restart things and see what gives.
> I actually tried something like this, also on Breezy: i have my screen connected at 1024x768 and changed $geometry to "640x480 in vnc.conf... No change..
As expected, with vino;)

>> So for your theory to work hfern, gtomsho would need log in blind (without a screen attached)...
> I actually logged out and guess what: there is no way how you can log into the system over vnc using vino. You indeed need to log in first on thje console and only
> then will vino let yousetup a connection Again, this is different then vncserver which defines a virtual X-terminal for you to log into.
Yep, as stated:).

> I tried the blind login with my screen disconnected: on my system it still provides a 1024x768 screen over vino.
As expected... If the gfx adaper will work headless, it'll nog magically "downsize"... Unless it's a terminally stupid intel chipset gfx (I've not tested this, but those suckers poll the bios for available modes and might ... get confused...).

> This could be hardware related though, like Gns mentioned: 'Assuming the graphics adapter "wants to play" in such a setup'.
Perhaps, yes. But more likely SW, as a working hypothesis:-).

> I'd be interested to learn what gtomsho's testing with the monitor stilll in place will yield.
> Also, if gtomso reallly wants to leave the system without screen than this vino desktop sharing may not be the best solution. I would recommend a vncserver
> setup. This will give you all the flexibility to access the system remotely. Alternatively, connecting with an X-Terminal software package may be on option.

Yes, quite. Both on the recommendation to give us more info, and the recommendation to work with a real vnc (note: doesn't have to be RealVNC(tm):-) server setup... Which Ubuntu will gladly support.
You could even mix them, since the default setyup for any vncserver package is to provide a virtual screen at :1 (actually port 5901) while vino defaults to :0 (teh actual desktop.... on port 5900). "Best of both worlds":-).

As to determining what is up ... One has to check the .vnc directory (for any stray settings there) for the user Xvnc is running as, as well as the /etc/vnc.conf file...
Pretty much up to you now gtomsho, which way we go with this... Please work with us!

-- Glenn

No comment has been added to this question in more than 21 days, so it is now classified as abandoned.
I will leave the following recommendation for this question in the Cleanup topic area:

Accept hfern http:#16300521

Any objections should be posted here in the next 4 days. After that time, the question will be closed.

gheist
EE Cleanup Volunteer

Beg to differ. Although I wasn't up to speed at the begining of the Q, I certainly contribute to the possible solutions. This should be a split, if anything.

-- Glenn

I think my initial comment gives the cause for the behavior seen by gtomsho. My second comment gives the solution to the problem, i.e. use vncserver for a setup like this or use an X-Terminal connection.

>I certainly contribute to the possible solutions.
What exactly was your contribution, Gns?
Your initial comment was not correct. You did not know that vino provides vnc type of services for Ubuntu.
You've given a few suggestions on which I followed up, but none of them yielded anything.

You have challlenged me on my solution, but you've not been able to proof that there is anything else going on then what is stated in the question and for which I provided the cause and the solution.

Read my second comment and note that it precedes your second comment. I'm not saying you shouldn't have any credit, nor that you shouldn't be credited with the "answer" as such, only that you are not the sole contributor to the probable solution.
You didn't exactly nail this one either, but we did perhaps do so together.

-- Glenn

I will verify both solutions. No need to fight yet.

> I will verify both solutions
Again, what solution of yours are you going to verify? You have not represented any solution.

In your second comment, you've brought up the idea that another package might have been installed. There is nothing to prove that idea. It does not explain the behavior and you did not present it as a solution for the problem. I did that in my second comment.

1) Yours - vino & desk resolutions
2) Gns's - maybe it runs just Xvnc from gdm as needed
3) Both can be applied,
...
99) Asker comes back and says which one worked.

Exactly my point Andrew... As I see it, there is no "true solution" as of yet, and there certainly cannot be one without point 99.
Hfern, your comments are valuable, knowledgeable and probably useful. But do they constitute a true answer? Using "definite" language doesn't mean much in this (I tend to be ... cautious(sp?)... in my formulations... Doesn't mean I don't think I'm right, just that I'm not adamant:-):-). Your second comment corroborates that this is probably not vino at all (which concurs with my testing), but rather Xvnc some way or other... And then we're probably not "detailed enough", any one of us (in which case it might be right to just delete the Q).
My tests on a machine with intel chipset gfx has not revealed the behaviour, but that just shows that that particular machine doesn't exhibit this (with vino).

The most relevant (common to us all) comment is the plea for interraction from gtomsho.
And I'm certainly not out to "fight", nor to "hog a Q"... I'm just announcing a difference of opinion as to the disposition of the Q.

-- Glenn

Let's just see what gheist or gstomsho will come up with.

Good suggestion. Who knows, it might still be HW.... Personally I hate these questions where one never reaches an "endpoint", regardless if I'm right or not.... (I've seen some things turn around on my reasoning, once the asker has taken the time to actually participate, more than once, to say the least:-).
We'll see, hopefully.

Cheers
-- Glenn

That is the problem. Based on long exposure to KDE hfern's hint of default resolution without monitor seemed to be the very case.
Thanks for clearing my sight.
I will come back tomorrow with disposal suggestion.

No comment has been added to this question in more than 21 days, so it is now classified as abandoned.
I will leave the following recommendation for this question in the Cleanup topic area:

Split between hfern #16300521 and Gns #16301447

Any objections should be posted here in the next 4 days. After that time, the question will be closed.

gheist
EE Cleanup Volunteer