You have to get some more inormation on what's going
on   at a connectivity level.  I would use Ethereal
and compare both communications.  This will give a
better understanding from the protocal/traffic
perspective.
I don't no much about Tarantella, but I think you
should make sure you have all the patches on your Sol
8 box.  Did you try this with a Solaris 9 install?
Hope it helps.

Ralf

--- Althea Booysen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> Hope someone can help me with this.
> 
> We've got a couple of users that's accessing some of
> our application via
> Tarantella on Sunray. The user's are complaining of
> slow response when
> using it on SunRay, but if they use the native
> client of any Windows
> machine it's fine!
> 
> I've logged calls to both SUN and Tarantella, but
> it's just ended up in
> finger-pointing...Wonder what they gonna do know
> that SUN has bought
> Tarantella.
> 
> Sunray Version:
> 
> PKGINST:  SUNWuto
>       NAME:  Sun Ray server Core Software
>   CATEGORY:  system, sunray
>       ARCH:  sparc
>    VERSION:  2.0_37.b, REV=2002.12.19.07.46
>    BASEDIR:  /opt
>     VENDOR:  Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>       DESC:  Sun Ray server, administration and user
> commands
>     PSTAMP:  SunOS_5.8_20040612101906
>   INSTDATE:  Jul 23 2004 02:41
>    HOTLINE:  Please contact your local service
> provider
>     STATUS:  completely installed
>      FILES:      165 installed pathnames
>                    9 shared pathnames
>                   16 directories
>                  122 executables
>                    4 setuid/setgid executables
>                13096 blocks used (approx)
> SunOS 5.9 Generic_117171-02 sun4u sparc SUNW,
> Sun-Fire-480R
> 
> Tarantella Version:
> 
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 for SPARC Solaris 2.8+
> (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Andrew Fonts (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Hangul Fonts (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 ICL Fonts (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Oriental Fonts (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 SCO Term Fonts (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Platform Identity Pack for
> SPARC Solaris 2.8+
> (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Security Pack for SPARC
> Solaris 2.8+ (3.40.911)
> Tarantella Enterprise 3 Windows Connectivity Pack
> for SPARC Solaris 2.8+
> (3.40.911)
> Architecture code: spso0508
> This host: SunOS 5.8 Generic_108528-27 sun4u sparc
> SUNW, Sun-Fire-280R
> 
> Regards,
> Althea
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 14 September 2005 11:02 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: SunRay-Users Digest, Vol 20, Issue 22
> 
> Send SunRay-Users mailing list submissions to
>       [email protected]
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> 
>
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
>       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of SunRay-Users digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: screensaver behavior in NSCM ({Darkavich}
> Steven Misrack)
>    2. Re: screensaver behavior in NSCM
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>    3. Re: THINC: can the Sun Ray be improved using
> any of this?
>       ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>    4. Re: THINC: can the Sun Ray be improved using
> any of this?
>       (Ivar Janmaat)
>    5. Re: THINC: can the Sun Ray be improved using
> any of this?
>       (Hagen Heiduck)
> 
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:37:05 -0700
> From: {Darkavich} Steven Misrack
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [SunRay-Users] screensaver behavior in
> NSCM
> To: SunRay-Users mailing list
> <[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
> delsp=yes; format=flowed
> 
> This happened to me when I went from 3.0 to 3.1
> beta.
> 
> I had to delete and re-install 3.1 beta fresh.
> I think the problem is a corrupt LDAP entry.
> 
> The problem went away once I did that. (Although it
> may have been  
> because I trashed the entire install) ;-)
> 
>      -Steve
> 
> On Sep 13, 2005, at 13:11, Neal A. Lucier wrote:
> 
> > {Darkavich} Steven Misrack wrote:
> >
> >> I had this same problem. We had to disable all
> screen locking  
> >> because  there was a nasty bug in SRSS2 patch -05
> that causes the  
> >> session to  be terminated upon detaching when the
> screen saver was  
> >> active.
> >> GNOME seems to be very teprimental about when it
> does the right  
> >> thing  or even listens to what is in the screen
> saver config. We  
> >> can't  change it from GNOME. (Known bug that sun
> has not fixed yet).
> >> We have to tell our users to go into CDE, disable
> the screen  
> >> saver/ screen lock if they don't want to detach
> when it comes on.
> >> I really think this should be user configurable,
> and not dependent  
> >> on  PAM. A simple Detach_Upon_Lock variable would
> be nice.
> >>
> >
> > We are having a whole slew of problems with NSCM. 
> I just turned it  
> > on over the weeked to improve load balancing,
> which it has been  
> > doing an excellent job of; however...
> >
> >  - with an extremely small subset of users after
> they enter in  
> > their login name, the password dialog box never
> appears, the DTU  
> > just sits there with a grey background and the dt
> "X" mouse  
> > cursour, the DTU needs to be power cycled
> >  - in xscreensaver prefences under GNOME,
> selecting the menu  
> > option, "blank now", detaches; unsetting the lock
> the screen option  
> > and waiting the n minutes, detaches; unsetting the
> lock the screen  
> > option and hitting the preview button, detaches;
> setting the blank  
> > at 10 minutes and the lock at 30 minutes, detaches
> after 10 minutes
> >  - one user doesn't show up in 'utwho', but does
> show up in finger:
> > bessel ~ % finger | grep dtlocal
> > [snip]
> > uxxxxx   William J Uxxxxx      dtlocal        2
> Mon 10:54  :17
> > [snip]
> > bessel ~ % utwho -aH
> > DISP    Token                            User
> > [snip]
> >  16 auth.kxxxxx                          kxxxxx
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users

Reply via email to