XDMCP on Windows 95

[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 with those parameters, as long as XWin.exe starts when you do not 
use those parameters.

Harold

J S wrote:

>
> 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:
>> 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 and send Query packets to the  speci-
>>                fied host.
>>
>>        -broadcast
>>                Enable  XDMCP and broadcast BroadcastQuery packets
>>                to the network.  The first responding display man-
>>                ager will be chosen for the session.
>>
>>        -indirect host-name
>>                Enable XDMCP and send IndirectQuery packets to the
>>                specified host.
>>
>>        -port port-num
>>                Use an alternate port number  for  XDMCP  packets.
>>                Must be specified before any -query, -broadcast or
>>                -indirect options.
>>
>>
>> Thus, you would do something like:
>> XWin -query smpd9 -port 6556 -fp tcp/smpd9:7100 -from a217447
>>
>>
>> Harold
>>
>> J S wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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, 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 mention that ``Product Foo'' 
>>>>>> uses port 177 would have been sufficient, right?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> AFAICT, it's the standard Cygwin response #13, issued when someone is
>>>>> confused about the process and wants to make a point by letting 
>>>>> everyone
>>>>> know how bad Microsoft is and exhorting all of us not to be that way.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, it was a value-free message.  Alexander's response 
>>>>> was
>>>>> perfectly clear and he didn't need to be taken to task for some 
>>>>> imagined
>>>>> attitude.
>>>>>
>>>>> cgf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the interest! Just to get things back into 
>>> perspective... The reason for choosing some random port number for 
>>> debugging xdm was because I couldn't kill the daemon on port 177 as 
>>> this machine is being used by other people .
>>>
>>> I was able to fire off a solaris desktop session on my windows 95 
>>> machine from the xdm on the server, but wasn't sure how to do it the 
>>> other way round i.e. run the XWin -query command and get it to 
>>> connect to my xdm debug instance running on the different port. Is 
>>> this possible?
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help,
>>>
>>> JS.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
>>> http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online 
> http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>