setting up vncserver on Fedora 16

Updated to reflect /etc/systemd, thanks for all the helpful comments.

The change to systemd from SysVinit caused a bit of an issue for vncserver configuration. In the past I would edit


, with systemd the process is quite different.

For our example I will setup vncserver to have display :3 running at a resolution of 1600×900. If you want a different number simply replace it with the number of choice.

sudo yum install tigervnc-server
sudo cp /lib/systemd/system/vncserver@.service /etc/systemd/system/vncserver@:3.service

Next you will need to edit the service file with the username you want vncserver to run under and any vnc options you want.

sudo vi /etc/systemd/system/vncserver@:3.service

The file will look something like this when you open it:

# comment redacted
Description=Remote desktop service (VNC)

ExecStart=/sbin/runuser -l  -c "/usr/bin/vncserver %i"
ExecStop=/sbin/runuser -l  -c "/usr/bin/vncserver -kill %i"


Change <USER> with the username you want to run vncserver under. For our case let’s use kdr.

Next add the vnc options you want after the %i. Since we want it to run at a resolution of 1600×900 we will add -geometry 1600x900.

ExecStart=/sbin/runuser -l kdr -c "/usr/bin/vncserver %i -geometry 1600x900"
ExecStop=/sbin/runuser -l kdr -c "/usr/bin/vncserver -kill %i"

Save the file and enable the service:

sudo systemctl enable vncserver@:3.service

Now configure the password you want to use to connect to vnc. Run this
as the user you setup in the *.service file above i.e. kdr.


We now have vncserver setup with a username and a password, and enabled in the system. Two more things to check. First thing is verify you have the port open. The vnc display number will map to 5900 series of ports. Since we chose 3 vncserver will listen on port 5903. If you choose 1, it’ll be 5901, etc.

Let’s see if iptables is configured to listen to this port:

sudo iptables --list | grep 5903

Nope, let’s update iptables:

sudo vi /etc/sysconfig/iptables

Add this to the file:

-A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 5903 -j ACCEPT

Save the file, then restart iptables and verify that the port is active.

sudo systemctl restart iptables.service

sudo iptables --list | grep 5903
ACCEPT     tcp  --  anywhere             anywhere             state NEW tcp dpt:5903

Ok FINALLY we can start up vncserver.

sudo systemctl start vncserver@:3.service

Test it out by connecting with vncviewer
Enter the password you used for vncpasswd.


Piracy bills are ludicrous

Honorable Senator Hagan,

I sincerely doubt that American economy is affected by $58 billion a year due to piracy. That is precisely the problem I have with all piracy bills, their ludicrous claims of lost revenue. These numbers are calculated as if all the pirated material was going to be acquired legally by all. Most of the people that pirate would never have purchased the material to begin with especially at the prices the owners use to calculate the inflated numbers.

The real problem is that the piracy sites are out of American jurisdiction, if you want to prevent piracy then you need to make the content more easily accessible. It used to be a time when people were pirating music left and right. But once the music industry allowed the sale of music online at a price consumers are willing to pay, it has become EASIER to acquire the music legally than through other means. For less than a $1 people can get their music fix right then and there legally.

If the movie industry made their movies easier to acquire at a cheaper price, I bet piracy would go down tremendously. But they are greedy machines trying to squeeze every penny out of something including paying Congress to do their bidding. Just look at what the studios do to cable companies and Netflix. The movie industry should be focused on getting their content out to the masses, because if people can get the latest movies from Netflix, cable or for any of their devices cheaply, they won’t have to pirate them. This legislation is, in my opinion, going after the wrong thing.

It is a shame that you support this horrible bill, come re-election time, I’ll be voting for the OTHER candidate.

jesus rodriguez

January 19, 2012

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011, more commonly referred to as the PROTECT IP Act of 2011. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this important issue.

On May 12, 2011, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 (S. 968) was introduced in the Senate and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. This bill would allow the Attorney General, or an intellectual property rights owner who has been harmed by an Internet site dedicated to infringing activities (ISDIA), also known as a rogue website, to take action against that site. A site would be designated as an ISDIA if their sole purpose is to facilitate copyright infringement, or promote or sale of counterfeited American works.

A recent study suggests that copyright piracy alone costs the American economy as much as $58 billion a year and countless jobs. I strongly support the goal of reducing the theft of intellectual property that is so important to North Carolina’s economy, including our budding film industry, which is why I and 40 of my bipartisan cosponsors originally cosponsored this legislation last July.

As with all proposed legislation, legitimate concerns have been raised about some of the specific provisions in this bill. I believe that supporters and opponents of the bill, all of whom agree, after all, on the need to combat the theft of American intellectual property, should work together to address those concerns. As you may know, the Senate is scheduled to begin consideration of this legislation later this month, and I intend to approach the debate and amendment process with an open mind. Through a full and robust debate, I believe we can improve the legislation, ultimately reaching an agreement that will protect intellectual property without limiting innovation and creativity or creating unintended consequences.

Again, thank you for contacting my office. It is truly an honor to represent North Carolina in the United States Senate, and I hope you will not hesitate to contact me in the future should you have any further questions or concerns.


Kay R. Hagan