XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-11-29 Thread J S
Hi, When I try to run the command: XWin -query smpd9 -fp tcp/smpd9:7100 -from a217447 that brings up the solaris xdmcp session if I'm running XFree86 on win XP/2K or NT. But if I try to run this on windows 95, it bombs out. Is this because Xfree86 doesn't support XDMCP on Windows 9

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-11-29 Thread PD Dr. Edward Wornar
From: "J S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: XDMCP on Windows 95 Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:14:28 + > Hi, > > When I try to run the command: > > XWin -query smpd9 -fp tcp/smpd9:7100 -from a217447 > > that brings up the solaris xdmcp session if I'm runni

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-11-29 Thread J S
> Hi, > > When I try to run the command: > > XWin -query smpd9 -fp tcp/smpd9:7100 -from a217447 > > that brings up the solaris xdmcp session if I'm running XFree86 on win XP/2K > or NT. But if I try to run this on windows 95, it bombs out. > > Is this becau

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-11-29 Thread Alexander Gottwald
s on windows 95, it bombs out. Good. A very short error description with nearly no information. What's in /tmp/XWin.log What does xdm tell Is there any network traffic > Is this because Xfree86 doesn't support XDMCP on Windows 95? It does support windows 95. bye ago

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-11-29 Thread J S
s on windows 95, it bombs out. Good. A very short error description with nearly no information. What's in /tmp/XWin.log What does xdm tell Is there any network traffic > Is this because Xfree86 doesn't support XDMCP on Windows 95? It does suppor

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread J S
s on windows 95, it bombs out. Good. A very short error description with nearly no information. What's in /tmp/XWin.log What does xdm tell Is there any network traffic > Is this because Xfree86 doesn't support XDMCP on Windows 95? It does suppor

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > Fatal server error: > XDMCP fatal error: Session declined No valid address > > And yes I have read the FAQ and used the -from flag. There aren't any errors > in the xdm logs, so I tried to run the xdm in debug: > > xdm -udpPort 6556 -nodaemon -debug 10 -config Why this port? The

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Sylvain Petreolle
--- Alexander Gottwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > J S wrote: > > > Fatal server error: > > XDMCP fatal error: Session declined No valid address > > > > And yes I have read the FAQ and used the -from flag. There aren't > any errors > > in the xdm logs, so I tried to run the xdm in debug: >

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Alexander Gottwald
Sylvain Petreolle wrote: > > > xdm -udpPort 6556 -nodaemon -debug 10 -config > > > > Why this port? The default port is 177. > Alexander, this exactly Microsoft problem : M$ is building its products > thinking all people is using defaults, hiding some bugs that appear > only in some cases. If

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Harold L Hunt II
Sylvain, I am not understanding why your response was appropriate. The default port for XDM has nothing to do with Microsoft, unless Microsoft has decided to use port 177 for one of their products. If that was the case, then a simple mention that ``Product Foo'' uses port 177 would have been

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 04:33:26PM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote: >I am not understanding why your response was appropriate. The default >port for XDM has nothing to do with Microsoft, unless Microsoft has >decided to use port 177 for one of their products. If that was the >case, then a simple

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Harold L Hunt II
Okay, okay, but I didn't want to be that hard on Sylvain as he is a good contributor to our discussions... I just wanted to put up a friendly reminder that everyone, I more so than others, should sometimes tone down our messages. That's all. Harold Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Dec 03, 20

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread J S
Okay, okay, but I didn't want to be that hard on Sylvain as he is a good contributor to our discussions... I just wanted to put up a friendly reminder that everyone, I more so than others, should sometimes tone down our messages. That's all. Harold Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Dec

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Sylvain Petreolle
You're correct, I should have said 'product foo'... I took Microsoft as example because it was the first company I had in mind. I don't have anything against Microsoft, otherwise I wouldn't use Cygwin ;) In the company I'm working now, almost every network TCP port is customized. What I wanted to

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Harold L Hunt II
Ah ha... okay, but in this case it would be good to at least rule out the non-standard port as a possible culprit. Once the port is ruled out, we can move on to other possible solutions. Harold Sylvain Petreolle wrote: You're correct, I should have said 'product foo'... I took Microsoft as exa

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Harold L Hunt II
Yup, you can specify the port number. From the ``man Xserver'' page: XDMCP OPTIONS X servers that support XDMCP have the following options. See the X Display Manager Control Protocol specification for more information. -query host-name Enable XDMCP a

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Sylvain Petreolle
That's exactly what I have read in Alexander's answer: => Why this port? The default port is 177. Excuse me. > Your response would be barely understandable if someone had said "Hey > don't use a non-standard port!" but given that there was no hint of > that > in Alexander's response and it was ver

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-03 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 04:05:00AM +0100, Sylvain Petreolle wrote: >That's exactly what I have read in Alexander's answer: >=> Why this port? The default port is 177. >Excuse me. Um, that was a private message. Poor netiquette, there. cgf

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-04 Thread J S
Thanks, I tried specifying the port but nothing happened (incidentally the port number goes before the -query). I'm at a bit of a loss now as everyone on this list says that they can run xdmcp on windows 95, but I can't. Yet I can get it to run on win NT, 2000 and XP. The problem

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-04 Thread J S
I tried using the -ac on here as well but it didn't work :( JS. Yup, you can specify the port number. From the ``man Xserver'' page: XDMCP OPTIONS X servers that support XDMCP have the following options. See the X Display Manager Control Protocol specification for more

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-06 Thread J S
I just found out that if I do: xwin -fullscreen -depth 32 on the win95 machine, XFree fails to start. It only works when I set the depth to 8. Could this explain why I couldn't get xdmcp to work on my windows 95 machine? Yup, you can specify the port number. From the ``man Xserver'' page: X

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-06 Thread Harold L Hunt II
JS, That depends, were you passing those parameters to XWin.exe when trying to use XDMCP? If you were, then yes, they are likely the reason that XDMCP was failing, as XWin.exe was failing to start. If you were not passing those parameters, then it really does not matter that XWin.exe fails w

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-06 Thread J S
All i did was : xwin -query host -fp host:7100 -from mypc I didn't pass the extra parms so I guess there was a flaw in that theory! I'm clutching at straws a bit now though 'cos I'm desperate to sort this out. I would have a look at the source code but I can imagine it's going to be huge and

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-06 Thread Harold L Hunt II
Well, do you have any VPN software installed on the Windows 95 machine, or have you previously had some VPN software installed on that machine? A lot of the VPN programs replace many of the networking files and they are usually incompatible with Cygwin/XFree86. Some of those programs cause pro

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-07 Thread Andrew Markebo
/ "J S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | All i did was : > | xwin -query host -fp host:7100 -from mypc > | I didn't pass the extra parms so I guess there was a flaw in that | theory! I'm clutching at straws a bit now though 'cos I'm desperate to | sort this out. I would have a look at the source code

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-07 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > Would I be right > in saying though that the most likely cause has got to be something windows > 95-network related since the original message said invalid address and this > only occurs on win 95? Have you already tried the ls_netdev tool as suggested? bye ago -- [EMAIL PR

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-07 Thread Alexander Gottwald
Andrew Markebo wrote: > Just another wild thought.. not only VPN.. any other socket > handling/protecting software on the 95? Does the machine have winsock > 2 (does cygwin require winsock 2?)?? no. cygwin does work even with the old win95a class socket layer bye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http:/

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-08 Thread J S
J S wrote: > Would I be right > in saying though that the most likely cause has got to be something windows > 95-network related since the original message said invalid address and this > only occurs on win 95? Have you already tried the ls_netdev tool as suggested? bye ago -- Hi Al

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-08 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > Sorry I didn't realise what ls_netdev was before. I will try it tomorrow > when I go back to work. Maybe this will bring some light to the problem. > Anything suspicious there? Only that the dll reports more accourate values than ls_netdev *g* bye ago NP: Blutengel - Wonderl

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread J S
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, J S wrote: > Here's the output I got from ls_netdev, although what's confusing is I'm > using a token ring network connection, not ethernet as the output seems to > suggest: The code for win95 can only distinguish between ppp and other network interfaces. > > $ ls_netdev-

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread J S
J S wrote: > Sorry I didn't realise what ls_netdev was before. I will try it tomorrow > when I go back to work. Maybe this will bring some light to the problem. > Anything suspicious there? Only that the dll reports more accourate values than ls_netdev *g* bye ago Hi Alex, Here's th

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread J S
J S wrote: > Sorry I didn't realise what ls_netdev was before. I will try it tomorrow > when I go back to work. Maybe this will bring some light to the problem. > Anything suspicious there? Only that the dll reports more accourate values than ls_netdev *g* bye ago I finally got XDM wor

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread J S
J S wrote: > Sorry I didn't realise what ls_netdev was before. I will try it tomorrow > when I go back to work. Maybe this will bring some light to the problem. > Anything suspicious there? Only that the dll reports more accourate values than ls_netdev *g* bye ago NP: Blutengel - Wonder

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread Alexander Gottwald
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, J S wrote: > Here's the output I got from ls_netdev, although what's confusing is I'm > using a token ring network connection, not ethernet as the output seems to > suggest: The code for win95 can only distinguish between ppp and other network interfaces. > > $ ls_netdev-

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Class\NetTrans\0002] > "DriverDesc"="TCP/IP" > "IPAddress"="10.252.20.185" This is after you changed the IP-Address to fixed? bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-09 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > > I finally got XDM working on Windows 95 after changing my IP address to > fixed. It seems it doesn't work with DHCP (on win 95), is that right? It seems that the IP Address for DHCP configured inerfaces is not stored in the registry. The next days I'll powerup the win95 vmware and

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-10 Thread J S
J S wrote: > Yes. Sorry I should have given you the dump with DHCP. I will try and get > that for you tomorrow. You don't need to. I'll have to check some other sources of information in windows. The registry is only for static values. The dynamic values as used with DHCP are not reflected

Re: XDMCP on Windows 95

2002-12-13 Thread Alexander Gottwald
J S wrote: > > With DHCP, you can actually get the IP address by looking in: > > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\DHCP] > [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\DHCP\DhcpInfo00] On my win95 host only the DhcpInfo and OptionInfo keys exist. But it seems