Hi Bob,
I've not yet messed with LTSP, so pardon the newbie question.
Have a client that is using a MS Office 2000 Access database someone wrote.
They want to have a
mess of people remotely access this application. Obviously, its not
web-based, you need to use MS
Access.
Is
On Saturday 25 August 2007 03:00:24 Jim Kronebusch wrote:
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:11:28 +0700, Fajar Priyanto wrote
Hello all,
I took this part of dhcpd.conf from Jim Kronebusch yesterday :)
I have a situation where the LTSP5 clients is located in the same network
as the non-LTSP clients.
Shoot, I do need multiple simultaneous client access, and its a jet database..
rats. Thanks for the heads-up! Guess for this particular thing I'm gonna
have to use M$...
Bob
-- Original Message ---
From: Cardon Denis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ltsp-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
Hi Jaime,
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Jaime wrote:
The toshiba satellite 1405 though randomly freezes. It works for a few
minutes and suddenly it locks for 30 seconds to a few minutes. Most of
the time it returns to work after that time to lock again a few minutes
later.
Sounds like it could be
There's a way to separate the access database into a backend and
frontend. Giving every user their own frontend seems to help with the
multi-user problem, but Access is still not the best solution for this
type of use.
-Rob
Bob Puff wrote:
Shoot, I do need multiple simultaneous client access,
You might want to add up the licensing cost for all those seats of MS
Access and see if it'll pay to have someone rewrite the database in
MySQL or something similar.
Also, you can have a web-based frontend for Access. It's called a Data
Access Page. I don't know anything about it besides that.
Yes, but I want some to default to startx, and some to default to
rdesktop. But for my own sanity, I'd like to be able to tell users that
Ctrl-Alt-F1 will give them Linux, and Ctrl-Alt-F2 will give them
Windows. It could be the other way around and I wouldn't care, but I'd
prefer to have it be
Kai Wollweber wrote:
Am Freitag, 24. August 2007 17:10 schrieb José Queiroz:
Hummm... errr... have you ever thought about swapping screen_01 and
screen_02, so rdesktop comes out on screen_01, on the selected
clients? It's easy to do that, said:
[Rdestop_Default]
SCREEN_01 = rdesktop
Hi Bob,
Bob Puff wrote:
Shoot, I do need multiple simultaneous client access, and its a jet database..
rats. Thanks for the heads-up! Guess for this particular thing I'm gonna
have to use M$...
one thing I've heard from professionals working with MSJet/MS Access
DB's in Linux settings, is
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
Hi Bob,
Bob Puff wrote:
Shoot, I do need multiple simultaneous client access, and its a jet
database..
rats. Thanks for the heads-up! Guess for this particular thing I'm gonna
have to use M$...
one thing I've heard from professionals working with MSJet/MS
Rob Owens wrote:
Kai Wollweber wrote:
Am Freitag, 24. August 2007 17:10 schrieb José Queiroz:
Hummm... errr... have you ever thought about swapping screen_01 and
screen_02, so rdesktop comes out on screen_01, on the selected
clients? It's easy to do that, said:
Rob Owens wrote:
I created a startx.wait script, which is the same as the startx script
with the following modification. It contains the lines:
echo -nPress enter to Login to Windows
read
Whoops! That should have read Press enter to Login to Linux
after the
Robin Bonin wrote:
Running LTSP 5 on ubuntu, I need to be able to remote reboot the clients
(I have some clients inside the ceiling driving some monitors with
company stats on them). Ltspinfo seems like it is the right answer in
4.1, but I cant find it on my system. Is there anything else,
Sherwood Botsford wrote:
Why are you reluctant to run ssh?
The biggest problem with running sshd on the thin client is mainly
a performance issue: if you've got 1ghz clients with goodly amount
of ram, yeah, it's a great solution. Problem is, we've got a lot
of people running some really low
Le lundi 27 août 2007 à 13:22 -0500, Scott Balneaves a écrit :
The biggest problem with running sshd on the thin client is mainly
a performance issue: if you've got 1ghz clients with goodly amount
of ram, yeah, it's a great solution. Problem is, we've got a lot
of people running some really
Hi,
I installed restricted-modules and changed XSERVER=nvidia to lts.conf
that worked.
PS. thanks to ogra about this...
2007/8/21, Peter Scheie [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It may be an X problem. I had similar problems on an HP server and a
no-name box server. It had to do with a problem X
Jean-Michel Dault wrote:
Le lundi 27 août 2007 à 13:22 -0500, Scott Balneaves a écrit :
The biggest problem with running sshd on the thin client is mainly
a performance issue: if you've got 1ghz clients with goodly amount
of ram, yeah, it's a great solution. Problem is, we've got a lot
of
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 01:22:02PM -0500, Scott Balneaves wrote:
Sherwood Botsford wrote:
Why are you reluctant to run ssh?
The biggest problem with running sshd on the thin client is mainly
a performance issue: if you've got 1ghz clients with goodly amount
of ram, yeah, it's a great
Le lundi 27 août 2007 à 15:19 -0500, Scott Balneaves a écrit :
Don't forget that you can run ssh under inetd/xinetd, which means that,
until there's a connection, you don't use any resources.
Good point, we'd have to do some fancy footwork for a few things:
1) We don't want a static
1) We don't want a static inetd.conf, as if no printer's defined
for a terminal, there's no point in starting jetpipe at all. So,
what we'd want to do, on boot, is zero out the inetd.conf file, and
then update-inetd calls based on things like if PRINTER_0_DEV/PORT
are set, LOCALDEV=true are
Has anyone else seen this problem?
A client called me this morning about not having a GDM login manager
anymore, just a grey screen and the X mouse icon. I messed with it for
hours and found nothing wrong other then the gdm logs when I have debug
on is showing negative session ID's, but not
Here is negative session ID's that say accept but it still fails to
start the login manager on the terminal.
Aug 27 16:03:53 desktopserver gdm[3003]: gdm_xdmcp_decode: Received
opcode REQUEST from client 192.168.0.39
Aug 27 16:03:53 desktopserver gdm[3003]: gdm_xdmcp_handle_request: Got
REQUEST
22 matches
Mail list logo
