Re: Error: Can't open display: 192.168.21.159:0.0
Re: Error: Can't open display: 192.168.21.159:0.0
- Subject: Re: Error: Can't open display: 192.168.21.159:0.0
- From: Jeremy Huddleston <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 18:59:54 -0800
On Dec 9, 2010, at 18:51, Ambrose LI wrote:
> 2010/12/9 Jeremy Huddleston <email@hidden>:
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2010, at 11:11, William Adams wrote:
>>
>>> Managed to puzzle out that the missing file I mentioned previously was not being found 'cause I failed to execute a
>>>
>>> source /etc/xyvision/xyv.cshrc
>>>
>>> line.
>>>
>>> Now, I'm stymied by the error in the subject line:
>>>
>>> Error: Can't open display: 192.168.21.159:0.0
>>
>> Don't set $DISPLAY unless you *really really really* know what you're doing.
>>
>>> I've entered the command:
>>>
>>> [William-Adamss-iMac-2:~] williamadams% xhost +
>>> access control disabled, clients can connect from any host
>>
>> That is highly insecure. Also, TCP/IP connections are disabled by default (to prevent people from doing things like this). If you really want to open yourself up to security risks, you can enable this in the security preference pane.
>>
>>> I was told to try:
>>>
>>> [William-Adamss-iMac-2:~] williamadams% echo $DISPLAY
>>> :1.0
>>
>> That would be wrong to. Don't set $DISPLAY. Check your ~/.*rc ~/.profile files
>>
>> If you do it right (ie, you do nothing), it will look like this:
>>
>> $ echo $DISPLAY
>> /tmp/launch-XXXXXX/org.macosforge.xquartz:0
>>
>> or
>>
>> $ echo $DISPLAY
>> /tmp/launch-XXXXXX/org.x:0
>
> I don't want to sound overly critical of Apple's policy of
> discouraging this, but if you have read the original mail carefully,
> it would be obvious that he didn't do anything (until told to try :1
> as a "shot in the dark"). It's the (most likely closed-source)
> software that insists on this.
It's not really "Apple Policy" so much as common sense. If you set DISPLAY in ~/.bashrc or somewhere else, it's most likely going to be wrong.
Furthermore, people who try to use TCP/IP for X11 connections overwhelmingly open themselves up to security concerns. The attempt to use 'xhost +' proves that. It's not "Apple Policy" that I'm talking about here, it's the X.org community and the security community at large saying "Don't do that." We put in a ton of work to make sure that ssh forwarding "just works" so this kind of thing wouldn't be a problem.
If it's some closed software with their own version of libX11, then they should update. libX11 has had support for the launchd socket for about 3 years now.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden