Fix failure to specify port for TurboVNC server #99
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I will automatically update this comment whenever this PR is modified |
consideRatio
changed the title
This was referenced Mar 8, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Without specifying a port for TurboVNC, we will fail to wrap it I think. jupyter-server-proxy will proxy to the port websockify listens to, and websockify is configure to listen to
{port}correctly, but I think this port must be the same what is to be wrapped - otherwise it won't wrap that specific bind I think. Note that all examples include specifying websockify port for the wrapped command as well (or know it and match it without specifying it to match).With this, things work - without it it doesn't for TurboVNC.
Debugged in #98 (comment). I've tested this to resolve #54 manually.