[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: some simple questions on VNC



On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, John Summerfield wrote:

> Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> > 2) apparently, although the man page for "vncviewer" doesn't
> > mention it, you can view to a given port number rather than a
> > display number. so either of the following would work equally
> > well:
> >
> >   $ vncviewer 192.168.1.100:5
> >   $ vncviewer 192.168.1.100:5905
> >
> > although as long as there is that 1:1 mapping, there would seem to
> > be little point using the port number since the display number
> > would work just as well and is clearly shorter.
>
> You need to verify this with other VNC implementations (TightVNC is
> fairly popular). If yoy are correct, you might also report it as a
> bug, either it works incorrectly or it's documented incorrectly.

with vncserver running at 5901, here's the results:

  $ vncviewer <remote>:1	works
  $ vncviewer <remote>:5901     works
  $ vncviewer <remote>::1       nope, "Connection refused"
  $ vncviewer <remote>::5901    works

should i have expected that?  there's nothing in the man page for
vncviewer that remotely suggests a "::" variation.  (this is all based
on the stock f8 vnc packages -- no tightvnc tests yet.)

if need be, i can bugzilla this as just a confusing bit of lack of
documentation.

rday

p.s.  maybe i'll just RTFS to see how the command-line args are being
parsed.

--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

Home page:                                         http://crashcourse.ca
Fedora Cookbook:    http://crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Fedora_Cookbook
========================================================================


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]