Mailing List Archive

On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 08:44:08PM -0500, Ryan DeBerry wrote:
> I want to be able to telnet to the conserver and use it in that aspect.

why? the console client can run just about anywhere.

> I can telnet to port 50000 and connect to a console, however there is no
> interaction after you connect a console.

see https://www.conserver.com/pipermail/users/2006-March/msg00033.html,
sounds like the same issue.

> Is this a feature that is supported currently or am I stretching it? Other
> than that I can connect and interact with console from the local server.

well, it's supported in that as long as you chat using the protocol it's
expecting, yes.

oh, and going directly to the higher-numbered port instead of the -p arg
and then using the protocol to find the console may not always work...it
probably will, depending on what the machine is doing, but it's not
guaranteed (and if you edit the config and send a HUP, all bets are
off).

i'd certainly like to know why you're trying to avoid the client, 'cause
if something is lacking, it might be possible to add an enhancement.
but i can imagine edge cases that would require it...

good luck!

Bryan
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

Thanks for the reply. I am trying to emulate a Cisco 2511 or equivalent.
Searching through the mailing-lists I found ser2net and it is working like I
need for my situation.

On 3/30/06, Bryan Stansell <bryan@conserver.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 08:44:08PM -0500, Ryan DeBerry wrote:
> > I want to be able to telnet to the conserver and use it in that aspect.
>
> why? the console client can run just about anywhere.
>
> > I can telnet to port 50000 and connect to a console, however there is no
> > interaction after you connect a console.
>
> see https://www.conserver.com/pipermail/users/2006-March/msg00033.html,
> sounds like the same issue.
>
> > Is this a feature that is supported currently or am I stretching
> it? Other
> > than that I can connect and interact with console from the local server.
>
> well, it's supported in that as long as you chat using the protocol it's
> expecting, yes.
>
> oh, and going directly to the higher-numbered port instead of the -p arg
> and then using the protocol to find the console may not always work...it
> probably will, depending on what the machine is doing, but it's not
> guaranteed (and if you edit the config and send a HUP, all bets are
> off).
>
> i'd certainly like to know why you're trying to avoid the client, 'cause
> if something is lacking, it might be possible to add an enhancement.
> but i can imagine edge cases that would require it...
>
> good luck!
>
> Bryan
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users@conserver.com
> https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users
>

On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 21:17 -0500, Ryan DeBerry wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. I am trying to emulate a Cisco 2511 or
> equivalent. Searching through the mailing-lists I found ser2net and
> it is working like I need for my situation.
>

Well you've created a dumb terminal server with none of the features of
conserver. If you want one of those look on eBay for old Computone
RAS2000s


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

Bryan Stansell wrote:
> i'd certainly like to know why you're trying to avoid the client, 'cause
> if something is lacking, it might be possible to add an enhancement.
> but i can imagine edge cases that would require it...

In my case, I was avoiding the client because of support issues: most of
the organization at my location uses Windows, and although a number of
users have Cygwin, most of them didn't install the compilers and
libraries necessary to build the client. It also turns out that
distributing a Cygwin binary from my box requires a very similar Cygwin
install on other people's machines. Or something. It's complicated.

A standalone, Win32-native (non-cygwin) build of console would be
lovely, if someone could instruct me in doing it.

Meanwhile, the *bigger* issue is time and education. Nearly everybody
uses Terra Term (ugh!) connected to their own box, and the only
advantage most people see in conserver is the ability to centralize the
logging of all the QA terminals to our fileserver, and adding timestamps
every minute.

I'm wearing my QA hat at this job, not the sysadmin hat. It's been
easier for me to sell the idea of installing Ruby and using automation
scripts I've written, rather than having people build stuff on cygwin.
That said, nobody but me has bothered using this anyway, even though
I've written internal documentation. I get the feeling that this is an
uphill and mostly pointless battle now.

Any suggestions are quite welcome.

--
Chris Riddoch
epistemological humility

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 08:30 -0700, Chris Riddoch wrote:
>
> Any suggestions are quite welcome.

I have a java client that is licensed by us. Not OSS. I'm not against
making OSS if it can get an injection of being better. It needs serious
assistance in the area of emulation.

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 08:30 -0700, Chris Riddoch wrote:
> In my case, I was avoiding the client because of support issues: most
> of
> the organization at my location uses Windows, and although a number of
> users have Cygwin, most of them didn't install the compilers and
> libraries necessary to build the client. It also turns out that
> distributing a Cygwin binary from my box requires a very similar
> Cygwin
> install on other people's machines. Or something. It's complicated.

Well there is no Win32 code in console so it is not native. You need
Cygwin. a few years back I compiled a version in Cygwin and made it
available to our customers. You do not need the Cygwin environment.
You only need the dll. So I created a zip file that contained
console.exe and cygwin?.dll. It worked fine on the cmd.com prompt.

It is console from 7.2.7 though.



_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:49:02AM -0500, Christopher Fowler wrote:
> available to our customers. You do not need the Cygwin environment.
> You only need the dll. So I created a zip file that contained
> console.exe and cygwin?.dll. It worked fine on the cmd.com prompt.

and this should work with 8.x.x as well. you might need to compile
things with '--with-port=XXX' so that an /etc/services lookup isn't
needed, but aside from that, i don't see why dropping console.exe and
cygwin1.dll in a directory and running it won't work. haven't tried,
however (i have a small development cygwin environment on my laptop).

the exception to this might be if you compile with ssl or other extra
libraries...the might require extra things to distribute.

as for the education issue, well, perhaps it's just not right for your
environment. i would make the claim that conserver would be right for
*any* environment since it allows for logging (so you can go back and
see what was wrong) and cooperative work on a single console. just
those two features alone (not to mention the many others) make it worth
the effort in my book. but, work habits and a willingness for change
can be a long, hard battle, so you should obviously do what you feel is
right.

sure would be entertaining to at least have a native console binary for
windows...that would help ease everyone's pain. who knows how tricky
that'll be, though (i'm no windows programmer, that's for sure).

Bryan
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 08:05 -0800, Bryan Stansell wrote:
> and this should work with 8.x.x as well. you might need to compile
> things with '--with-port=XXX' so that an /etc/services lookup isn't
> needed, but aside from that, i don't see why dropping console.exe and
> cygwin1.dll in a directory and running it won't work. haven't tried,
> however (i have a small development cygwin environment on my laptop).

I do remember having to use --with-port=XXX option. I also remember
having to compile as static. I was hoping static would remove the
cygwin1.dll requirement but that was the only one required.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

Bryan Stansell wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:49:02AM -0500, Christopher Fowler wrote:
>> available to our customers. You do not need the Cygwin environment.
>> You only need the dll. So I created a zip file that contained
>> console.exe and cygwin?.dll. It worked fine on the cmd.com prompt.
>
> and this should work with 8.x.x as well. you might need to compile
> things with '--with-port=XXX' so that an /etc/services lookup isn't
> needed, but aside from that, i don't see why dropping console.exe and
> cygwin1.dll in a directory and running it won't work. haven't tried,
> however (i have a small development cygwin environment on my laptop).

I'll give that a try when I get a chance. I hadn't thought to build a
static binary (another suggestion I got).

> sure would be entertaining to at least have a native console binary for
> windows...that would help ease everyone's pain. who knows how tricky
> that'll be, though (i'm no windows programmer, that's for sure).

Yeah, neither am I. I'm trying to stay sane with SuSE on VMWare. (sigh)

--
Chris Riddoch
epistemological humility

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users

One idea is having them ssh or telnet to the console server, logging ing
and then executing console directly. With a front end on the console
server you can make this easy on them

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 09:13 -0700, Chris Riddoch wrote:
> Bryan Stansell wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 10:49:02AM -0500, Christopher Fowler wrote:
> >> available to our customers. You do not need the Cygwin environment.
> >> You only need the dll. So I created a zip file that contained
> >> console.exe and cygwin?.dll. It worked fine on the cmd.com prompt.
> >
> > and this should work with 8.x.x as well. you might need to compile
> > things with '--with-port=XXX' so that an /etc/services lookup isn't
> > needed, but aside from that, i don't see why dropping console.exe and
> > cygwin1.dll in a directory and running it won't work. haven't tried,
> > however (i have a small development cygwin environment on my laptop).
>
> I'll give that a try when I get a chance. I hadn't thought to build a
> static binary (another suggestion I got).
>
> > sure would be entertaining to at least have a native console binary for
> > windows...that would help ease everyone's pain. who knows how tricky
> > that'll be, though (i'm no windows programmer, that's for sure).
>
> Yeah, neither am I. I'm trying to stay sane with SuSE on VMWare. (sigh)
>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users