Hello! I agree. I normally use PuTTY for communicating with my Linux systems, and sometimes an individual running Solaris.
It also runs very well from a thumb drive connected to a client's machine and that connection looping back here. Of course there are issues with systems who wear a regular SSH client as part of their normally installed collection..... -- Gregg C Levine hansolofal...@worldnet.att.net "The Force will be with you always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Henry E > Schaffer > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 11:24 AM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] PuTTY replacement KiTTY > > David Andrews writes: > > On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 10:37 -0400, Lionel B Dyck wrote: > > > PuTTY fork called KiTTY that was just recently > > > updated. It has all the PuTTY features (since it is a fork from it) and > > > more: > > > > ... plus a nasty limitation. From their website: > > > > "KiTTY is only designed for Microsoft Windows" > > I've only used PuTTY on MS Windows. There's no need for it on my Mac, > Solaris and Linux boxes. > > I.e., I don't think of that as being a limitation. > -- > --henry schaffer > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or > visit > http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
