> If you have listening turned on and Growl is running, then that's curious.

Sorry, I think explaining my assumptions was a little confusing and
obviously didn't really help.

So...

The sender is not in "listening" mode and does not listen on either
ports. The receiver is in "listening" mode but seems to only listen on
UDP port 9887. Shouldn't it also listen on 23052? It is announce like
that over Bonjour at least. Anyway...

> DO over the network is for forwarding, not original notifications.

Right.

> Because you didn't tell growlnotify to address a specific host. As I told you 
> before, unless you name a host for it to talk to, it will ignore the -u flag 
> and send a local, not network, notification.

I did try the "-H" option. And it works fine like this

 sender$ growlnotify -H receiver.local -P secret -m test

(as a side note: it segfaults when I don't specify a password).

This DOES bring up the notification on the receiver machine. But
that's really not what I was after. So I am currently wondering
whether I misunderstood you.

When setting up the forwarding I assumed that all local notification
on the sender machine get forwarded to the receiving machine.  So a
local "growlnotify" is being forwarded to the receiver machine without
me having to specify the destination.

>From the console logs I currently assume/hope that the "only" problem
is that somehow the growl on the sender machine does not have the
correct password (despite the fact they *are* the same as I confirmed
in the keychain on both machines).

BTW: thanks for the patience :)

cheers
--
Torsten

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Growl Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.

Reply via email to