[Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Index] [Thread Next]
Pete Geenhuizen pgeenhuizen@carolina.rr.com
Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
I'm running 8.1.4, and I just thought of something that might have a baring on this, I compiled it on Solaris 8 and copied the binaries over to another server running Solaris 7. I then run console on a Solaris 8 box connecting to the conserver binary and configuration on the Solaris 7 server. I wonder if that might be the problem. I'll look at that and your other suggestion in the morning. I sure hope that moving everything over to Solaris 8 server solves the problem. Either way I'll let you know what happens and send you as much debugging stuff as I can. Pete -- "Unencumbered by the thought process" --1992-2000 Click and Clack presidential campaign slogan Bryan Stansell said: > ooops...hit the wrong key and off went half of an email...sorry about > that. here's the rest... > > what i'd like to know is, what version are you running (certain versions > have had trouble with the encoding of the data on the wire), and can you > run conserver in debug mode (just one -D is good for this info) and send > it to me? there are particular things i'd like to look at to see if the > telnet state was changing (or perhaps a message from the term server > said it's state changed), etc. maybe even two -D options would be > good...that would show all the data getting written to the file > descriptors too...which could verify if conserver is sending the > IAC/BREAK sequence properly. > > another option is to enable a debug mode in telnet and see if anything > happens when you log in (a transistion in some telnet state). i believe > you just crank up telnet, do a 'toggle options' and then 'open ...'. > it'll spew a bunch upon connection and the question is, do you get more > when you actually log in. if so, perhaps conserver isn't handling a > telnet option negotiation properly, and the break interpretation is > getting turned off somehow (whereas a regular telnet does work). this > is the only idea i have come up with so far to explain what you've seen. > and if you try this, it would be nice to see all the entire sequence. > > those are my current thoughts. if you can get any of this debugging > info (and version info), that would be cool. > > Bryan >