Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Putty disconnects with SSH2_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS for nonexistant channel 0

2,283 views
Skip to first unread message

Higorineth Ancalimae

unread,
Dec 2, 2013, 5:48:45 AM12/2/13
to
Hi,

I'm using the last snapshot (downloaded today) and got that error after authentification (password or keys) if compression is enabled on the SSH Configuration section.
Enabling compression seems to be the only parameter causing that error.

I tried against different SSH servers: RedHat, AIX, HPux, Cygwin with the same results.

Putty itself is launched from my Win XP or Win 7 PC.


The release version of putty is working fine.


Best Regards.

Simon Tatham

unread,
Dec 2, 2013, 6:04:01 AM12/2/13
to
Higorineth Ancalimae <higor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm using the last snapshot (downloaded today) and got that error after
> authentification (password or keys) if compression is enabled on the SSH
> Configuration section.
[...]
> The release version of putty is working fine.

So it does! Thanks for that report. I suspect that's an unintended
consequence of me shaking up the SSH packet receiver in order to cope
with the extra demands of the new connection-sharing feature. I'll
look into it.
--
Simon Tatham "You may call that a cheap shot.
<ana...@pobox.com> I prefer to think of it as good value."

Simon Tatham

unread,
Dec 2, 2013, 2:28:33 PM12/2/13
to
Simon Tatham <ana...@pobox.com> wrote:
> So it does! Thanks for that report. I suspect that's an unintended
> consequence of me shaking up the SSH packet receiver in order to cope
> with the extra demands of the new connection-sharing feature.

It was. Committed r10103. Tomorrow's snapshot should be better.
--
Simon Tatham "The voices in my head are trying to ignore me.
<ana...@pobox.com> But if I keep talking, I can drive them insane."

Higorineth Ancalimae

unread,
Dec 3, 2013, 7:18:02 AM12/3/13
to
Le lundi 2 décembre 2013 20:28:33 UTC+1, Simon Tatham a écrit :
> Simon Tatham <> wrote:
[...]
> Tomorrow's snapshot should be better.

Works fine again ;-)

Thanks for the quick patch.
0 new messages