Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Installing OpenIndiana, login screen is pelted with "^[[210z"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Installing OpenIndiana, login screen is pelted with "^[[210z"

    I want to try OpenIndiana so I've installed it in a KVM/QEMU virtual machine using OI-hipster-minimal-20181023.iso.

    I ran through the text install questions without any problem, but when I reboot, the login screen displays "^[[210z" about every one to two seconds, and my login attempt always fails. I reinstalled from scratch a second time to make real sure I entered the right password.

    That text looks like an ANSI escape sequence, but I wonder if it's getting entered in with my username and password. I can't type fast enough to avoid it.

    I can't proceed further if I can't log in. Does anyone know how to get logged in and how to stop the 210z's?

  • #2
    Ask #openindiana channel in IRC. I'd guess devs are probably your best chance for an actual assistance.

    Are you by chance using customized shell profile you used in some other OS previously?

    Asking because I had very similar shit when I tried to use customized .cshrc from my FreeBSD setup in DragonFly.
    Last edited by aht0; 02-09-2019, 08:37 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by aht0 View Post
      Are you by chance using customized shell profile you used in some other OS previously?
      I have a universal ~/.bashrc file that I use everywhere on every platform I can. If I can ever get logged into OpenIndiana, I'll copy it there too.

      But if the only support is through IRC, I'll pass. I'm already thinking of trying OmniOS instead, or maybe even real Solaris.

      Comment


      • #4
        Try without your own .bashrc first. Use generic one for test first. Perhaps it's the very reason. Then you can start adding to it from your custom .bashrc in order to get rid of the problem.

        Programs may behave slightly different after porting, some functionality you'd use in Linux might not be there on another OS et cetera. Just to give you an example, LS_COLORS in .cshrc does nothing on NetBSD. Otherwise I have the same pretty colorful shell with autocomplete, just not bash.

        I stopped trusting bash after "Shell Shock" bug, thought there's no real way to avoid it in Linux (except for musl-based distros that may have Busybox). I try to use it as little as possible though in terminal windows even when using Linux.
        Last edited by aht0; 02-10-2019, 11:46 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by aht0 View Post
          Try without your own .bashrc first. Use generic one for test first. Perhaps it's the very reason.
          You sound like you think I'm logged in. I can't use any rc file or any shell of any description until I get logged in.

          Actually, I am logged in now. When I installed it in the VM, I originally selected QXL driver so I could use the spice protocol. I prefer it because it adds adds a bit of paravirtualization for optimum performance. But alas, I couldn't get logged in, so I switched to VGA and VNC. Now I can finally login.

          Originally posted by aht0 View Post
          Programs may behave slightly different after porting, some functionality you'd use in Linux might not be there on another OS
          I know. That's the fun of bouncing around different OSes.

          Originally posted by aht0 View Post
          ... bash ..., thought there's no real way to avoid it in Linux ...
          Avoid bash? Why would any sane computer user want to do that? That bug was cured soon after it came out.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by KenJackson View Post
            Actually, I am logged in now.
            Cool

            Originally posted by KenJackson View Post
            Avoid bash? Why would any sane computer user want to do that? That bug was cured soon after it came out.
            Count me 'insane' in this case.
            • Fact #1 'ShellShock' remained undiscovered for 25 years, despite rather large user base.
            • Fact #2 After people started looking, they found half a dozen more CVE's in bash.
            Question: Considering the 'track record' - WHY should I keep trusting it? Especially when there are adequate alternatives around: csh/tcsh , Zsh
            For "Average Joe's-use case", neither lacks colored output support or autocomplete.

            99% users don't care about anything else. For scripting zsf is as good as bash and also csh/tcsh work in a pinch.
            Last edited by aht0; 02-11-2019, 05:51 PM.

            Comment

            Working...
            X