This is the mail archive of the cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: 2 instances of Xwin

From: Alexander Gottwald <Alexander dot Gottwald at s1999 dot tu-chemnitz dot de>
To: cygwin-xfree at cygwin dot com
Cc: Amr Mohamed Roushdi <aroushdi at fr dot ibm dot com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 13:59:22 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Re: 2 instances of Xwin
References: <OF63CF2F73.3CF0C454-ONC1256ED3.00287FE8-C1256ED3.002967BA@fr.ibm.com><Pine.LNX.4.55.0407161730290.1677@lupus.ago.vpn><Pine.GSO.4.58.0407161450030.10869@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
Reply-to: cygwin-xfree at cygwin dot com

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:

> Doesn't X bind to different ports depending on the display number?

Yes it does.

> Could it be that the X+10 port is in use, but X+5 isn't?

The error were talking about comes from the xdmcp code. It's
bind(socket(AF_INET, 0, SOCK_DGRAM), {AF_INET, "-from address", 177})

Maybe this fails if two instances of XWin are running together. But I've
never seen this fail before. Maybe omitting the "-from address" parameter
is the solution here.

bye
    ago
NP: Project Pitchfork - Drone Assembly
-- 
 Alexander.Gottwald@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de
 http://www.gotti.org           ICQ: 126018723

References:
- Re: 2 instances of Xwin
  - From: Alexander Gottwald
- Re: 2 instances of Xwin
  - From: Igor Pechtchanski

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]