Comment by: tlgrooms (130.51.175.70) | At: 26 Dec 2021, 17:31 | File version: 2006-2 |
Does anyone know if this allows you to specify the port to connect to? My pc at work has a nonstandard default port and when I try to connect by using ip:port with this client, it doesn't work. It works fine from my pc.
|
|
|
Comment by: jPV (84.248.18.119) | At: 07 Oct 2020, 16:13 | File version: 2006-2 |
@nexus Try this? https://library.morph.zone/Applications/RDesktop
|
|
|
Comment by: aGGreSSor (188.242.153.162) | At: 07 Oct 2020, 08:25 | File version: 2006-2 |
Why should it work? Win 10 was released 29 july 2015, but this client was released in 2006. RDP is proprietary protocol and was update.
|
|
|
Comment by: nexus (37.201.248.191) | At: 06 Oct 2020, 17:34 | File version: 2006-2 |
Hm. Seems not to work with windows 10? When try to connect, I immediately get the following error: "ERROR: recv:" Any comments/ideas/solution on that?
|
|
|
Comment by: HammerD (24.43.155.58) | At: 21 Mar 2006, 06:04 | File version: 2006-2 |
All outstanding GUI issues were fixed in this release. The rdesktop binary itself is unchanged from the last version.
|
|
|
Comment by: anonymous (208.46.72.228) | At: 20 Mar 2006, 15:59 | File version: 2006-2 |
Ok, yet another new version. What changed?!
|
|
|
Comment by: anonymous (24.43.155.58) | At: 21 Feb 2006, 06:44 | File version: 2006 |
No the version is from August 2005, but I could not release it until OS4 Update 4 was released - with AmiSSL V3.
|
|
|
Comment by: anonymous (65.191.33.56) | At: 15 Feb 2006, 00:03 | File version: 2006 |
Nice readme. But, the MOST important thing... What changed?
|
|
|
Comment by: McFly (84.61.211.216) | At: 14 Feb 2006, 17:43 | File version: 2006 |
great work, thx a lot :-)
|
|
|
Comment by: anonymous (129.100.166.99) | At: 14 Feb 2006, 16:01 | File version: 2006 |
Version string wasn't updated, but I assure you the binary was :)
|
|
|
Comment by: abalaban (81.255.229.37) | At: 14 Feb 2006, 14:42 | File version: 2006 |
Is there a typo or is it really a version from january *2005* ? If not a typo why more recent code couldn't be used ?
|
|
|