I thought something like that had already been done when folks were
finding router problems trying to get to the VA Demo? Joel Ivey did the
magic on that re-work.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Toppenberg
Sent: Friday, September 24,
How difficult would it be to modify the source code so
that a specific port is used for the call back, rather
than a random port. I would think that finding the
code would the difficult part. But after found, I
would think that specifying a given port would be
straightforward.
Kevin
--- CS Wag
I caught that part - I just don't like WMs (I'm assuming the workstation
version) used for production use in that manner since you have to:
a) leave the server logged in with the VM session (each one) started and
running
b) handle security level access for each system
c) buy an OS for each instance
Comments below.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "K.S. Bhaskar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
<...snipped...>
>
> On the call, I asked about the vendor organization that is being
created
> by a small number of vendors (Claudine gave their names as HP, Perot
> Systems, DSS, Oleen, InterSystems Medsphere an
That just sucks. Don't want to be too professional about it but when a
hospital can't provide their staff with the best tool to get the job
done - then what's the point?
They should help you setup your VPN and then support it. There are
always alternatives that can be placed into production with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David,
I think what is being suggested it the VM+ desktop run on the server and
the X session is forwarded to the remote box. Similar to a citrix set
up, just less costly well, except for the VMWare if that's whats used.
Now if the CPRS on WINE become f
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 14:59, CS Wagner wrote:
[KSB] <...snip...>
> As for VMWare et al, that is not allowed with this project. I had to
> fight a major uphill battle to get them to allow purchasing Windows to
> run the GUI version of CPRS. The initial project plan requested a free
> OS for b
Not sure a VM on a *nix desktop will work - sounds like the problem is
network level access between the servers and clients. A linux box would
still have the same problem and the same level of access as a pure
windows box.
If tunneling is the option that linux gives you, there are options just
li
I appreciate Bhaskars concern about another organization being
developed. That said, as I stated in the call, there is no reason to
fear/or fight over something that is still in discussions. The VistA
Software Alliance, as it is being called currently will be a fee based
membership organization.
I do not believe a text version is a viable option unless you are willing to
live the version of VistA you implement and plan to not install any of the
VistA patches that are released subsequent to that date. Also, you realize
that the CPRS developers stopped putting enhancements and improvements
For the price and setup of that - Terminal Server licenses may be in the
same range as well. Not sure.
And if you do go with VMs, use Win 98 as it doesn't eat as much away
from the host.
/David.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of K.S.
Bhask
That is great. I'll get the non-gui version and see how that flies.
As for the VPNs, I don't have a choice there. The hospital only allows
their VPN to be used. They monitor the network for rogue VPN activity
and shut down the ports of any VPN listeners. If I were to set up my
own VPN on the
You believe you will find documentation for the non GUI version of CPRS in
the www.va.gov/vdl web site right next to the CPRSGui documentation - CPRS
List Managers Version is it I think. John Zimmer is a fan of the non-GUI
interface as I recall.
CPRSGui did not come into existance until the mid-9
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 13:41, Beron, Claudine wrote:
[KSB] <...snip...>
> There will also be panel discussion which include:
> * Systems & Capacity Management
> * OpenSource and VistA (Workshop/Panel)
> * VistA Software Lifecycle
I presume multiple panel discussions is meant? Also I
Shaun --
Here is an alternative proposal. On the VistA server machine, or better
yet, on another PC inside the server firewall, run VMWare. For every
user that wants to run the CPRS GUI, fire up a Windows guest within
which the CPRS GUI will run. This Windows guest will run a TightVNC
(http://t
You have at least two more options depending on your resources (but it
sounds like your fighting against your IT group on this one).
Many hospitals use Terminal Services so that you can basically access a
server's desktop (for use by end users - no server end tools) and then
host the application
I would be interested in looking at a text version of CPRS, but it is my
understanding that CPRS does not allow you to add patients. So, I will
still need to set up accounts in Vista for the clerks to SSH in and
easily add patients as well as add visits for existing patients. With a
text vers
VistA Community Call Notes
1-866-639-4718 Access 9185610
September 24, 2003
Attendees:
Maury Pepper
Joseph Dal Molin
David Whitten
Chris Richardson
Rodney Kay
Crawford Rainwater
Tom Stelter
Dee Knapp
Tom Akerman
Phyllis Orr
Rober Witkop
K.S. Bhaskar
Brian Lord
Gordon Morsehead
Summer Chase
Mark ?
There is a text version of the CPRS if you can connect
to your server via telnet or ssh. Let me know if you
are interested. Its probably not what people want
right now.
Kevin
--- CS Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our problem is that we have a firewall on our
> network where the Vista
>
Shaun,
You probably do not have to take such drastic measures. Call me at
801-474-1600 ext. 227
Gordon Moreshead
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CS Wagner
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Hardhats-
Our problem is that we have a firewall on our network where the Vista
server is. The client side has a firewall also where CPRS is. CPRS
requires a connection from the server to the client on a randomly
generated port. To allow for that, we'd have to basically remove the
entire client-side f
What is the issue regarding your network security...it will be good to
know should others have a similar setup?
And dumb question...did you try setting up a VPN and tunneling...??
Joseph
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 10:32, CS Wagner wrote:
> It is becoming clear that we cannot use CPRS with our network
It is becoming clear that we cannot use CPRS with our network security.
Is it possible to effectively use Vista without CPRS? I can easily set
up SSH accounts for each user so that gtm starts when the login. I
assume that setting the primary menu in Vista will change what they see
once gtm s
You can also throw multiple video cards in unused PCI/ISA slots on your
PC, and attach a monitor to each one. Throw in some USB keyboards and
mice, and you have a computer system that can run Gnome/KDE (or other X
window manager) for multiple concurrent users. You will have to fiddle
/etc/X11/XF8
Back to the future???
Thinking out loud. Interesting sitemakes one wonder what it would
cost to build a terminal today, $50 ?, and whether the stage is set for
a resurgence in some application areas given their simplicity and
reliability etc. PC's are overkill in many hospital departments. In
Users of VistA / MUMPS, as well as nostalgia buffs, may find
http://vt100.net informative.
-- Bhaskar
***
This electronic mail transmission contains confidential and/or privileged information
intended only for the person(s)
When working with the Xdialog file, I have run up
against the limitation of string length.
The Xdialog command expects all the data for the
dialog to follow as command-line options. When
building up dialog with a list of options etc, it
doesn't take much to get 250+ characters.
Suprisingly, I se
27 matches
Mail list logo
