YAQ Setting up vncviewer

[Labitt, Bruce]

Comments below.

 

________________________________

From: tbuskey at gmail.com [mailto:tbuskey at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tom Buskey
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 4:49 PM
To: Labitt, Bruce
Cc: Greater NH Linux User Group
Subject: Re: YAQ Setting up vncviewer

 

 

2008/4/8 Labitt, Bruce <labittb1 at tycoelectronics.com>:

YAQ... :)

I'd like to vnc from my centos4.5 box (so far) to a ps3 running YDL6.  I can ssh from centos to ydl without a problem.  However, when I try to vnc from centos to ydl I get

Main: unable to connect to host:  No route to host (113)


Is vncserver running on ydl? (I know, but start at the basics)[Labitt, Bruce]  Yes, see below.
Which port is vncserver offering (5901?)[Labitt, Bruce]  I believe 5901 since it was assigned :1

Is ydl running a local firewall blocking the port?[Labitt, Bruce]  I don’t think so, how can I check?  I did not set one up.
Is vncviewer going to the right port?  (:1 is 5901, :2 is 5902, etc)[Labitt, Bruce]  Yes.  I entered xx.xx.xx.xx:1
Is there a local firewall on the centos running?[Labitt, Bruce]  No.  I did not set one up for the internal network.

Try telnet ydl 5901.  You should see this if you get through:
Trying x.x.x.x...
Connected to ydl.
Escape character is '^]'.
RFB 003.008
[Labitt, Bruce]  I get ydl:5901/telnet:  Name or service not known

 

I can telnet from ydl to centos!

 

	
	
	This is on a local network, so there is only a local dhcp server handing out ip's.  There is no nameserver.
	
	I can ping from centos to ydl and vice versa.  Any ideas on what to look for?  I am running vncserver on ydl, although it seems to make no difference on the centos to ydl vncviewer error output.
	
	TIA,
	Bruce
	
	-----Original Message-----
	From: gnhlug-discuss-bounces at mail.gnhlug.org [mailto:gnhlug-discuss-bounces at mail.gnhlug.org] On Behalf Of Šarunas
	Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 3:42 PM
	To: Greater NH Linux User Group
	Subject: Re: New distro question
	
	-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
	Hash: SHA1
	
	Ben Scott wrote:
	> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Šarūnas <sarunas at mail.saabnet.com> wrote:
	>> In case of Debian, unstable is quite stable actually ...
	>
	>   Last time I used it (about 14 months ago), Debian unstable had
	> package churn on the order of tens or hundreds of megabytes per week.
	
	True. It also is what some users need/enjoy/prefer... By "quite stable"
	I meant how relatively rarely things are broken seriously enough, given
	the release is officially labeled as unstable.
	
	Šarūnas
	
	
	
	-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
	Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
	Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
	
	iD8DBQFH+8qUVVkpJ1MUn+YRAg1KAJ9QTAn3SGjTTiAe+PDZZsStvYXGcgCfd1DH
	H/hb4zzhnK+uSKzrVsCmxok=
	=pLmF
	-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
	_______________________________________________
	gnhlug-discuss mailing list
	gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
	http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
	
	_______________________________________________
	gnhlug-discuss mailing list
	gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
	http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20080408/72ce30bf/attachment-0001.html