Hi all,
This question has been asked before on this board but has never had a real answer.
Is it possible to keep a user from disconnecting from a session? We have a customer whose users love to ctrl + break whenever they get a record lock. We have suppressed ctrl + break for them now but are worried that they may just disconnect and then reconnect instead. We can set @XFUNCT when they logon to prevent them from disconnecting by clicking the "X" in the top right corner of the screen but that still leaves the disconnect option in the Session menu and the disconnect button on the toolbar (can be removed from client options but can just as easily be re-added). Our clients are currently using version 5.5 build 524 of the client. Any help would be appreciated.
Click the link below to see the new game I'm developing!
Suppress Disconnect from Client
Started by
mikelandl
, Aug 23 2007 07:02 PM
14 replies to this topic
#2
Donald Miller
-
- Members
-
- 205 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cupar, Fife, Scotland
- Interests:Motorcycling, Running, Cooking
Posted 23 August 2007 - 10:13 PM
Hi Mike
Coincidentally some customers of mine love to use the X in the corner box. The variable &#@SUPP-CWIN is meant to be enabled and disabled to prevent or allow the use of this.
On my system (5.5 build 513) setting it either way makes no difference to the response obtained when the X is clicked. The response is always "Do you want to terminate the PRO-IV session ?"
The Logic Manual indicates that the message Window Close Not Allowed should be shown.
It has been reported to Pro IV and they have tested and accepted it as a bug. They are currently working on it.
When feedback is received I'll try and remember to pass it on.
Donald
Alternatively try:
suppress_closewin=Y
in the Pro4.ini (or other ini) file
I haven't verified this yet.
Coincidentally some customers of mine love to use the X in the corner box. The variable &#@SUPP-CWIN is meant to be enabled and disabled to prevent or allow the use of this.
On my system (5.5 build 513) setting it either way makes no difference to the response obtained when the X is clicked. The response is always "Do you want to terminate the PRO-IV session ?"
The Logic Manual indicates that the message Window Close Not Allowed should be shown.
It has been reported to Pro IV and they have tested and accepted it as a bug. They are currently working on it.
When feedback is received I'll try and remember to pass it on.
Donald
Alternatively try:
suppress_closewin=Y
in the Pro4.ini (or other ini) file
I haven't verified this yet.
Edited by Donald Miller, 23 August 2007 - 10:14 PM.
Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anytthing at all
#3
Donald Miller
-
- Members
-
- 205 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cupar, Fife, Scotland
- Interests:Motorcycling, Running, Cooking
Posted 23 August 2007 - 10:22 PM
suppress_closewin=Y
couldn't get that to work either.....
in pro4.ini or in another .ini file specified using INIPATH
couldn't get that to work either.....
in pro4.ini or in another .ini file specified using INIPATH
Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anytthing at all
#4
mikelandl
-
- Members
-
- 101 posts
Expert
Posted 24 August 2007 - 12:46 PM
suppress_closewin=Y
couldn't get that to work either.....
in pro4.ini or in another .ini file specified using INIPATH
Hi Donald,
Thanks for the suggestions. I've tried suppress_closewin=Y and the only thing it seems to do is not allow you to close a ProIV window (i.e. a WD,WS, etc..). It doesn't seem to be related to closing the actual client program unfortunately.
#5
Chris Mackenzie
-
- Members
-
- 372 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bristol, United Kingdom
Posted 24 August 2007 - 02:49 PM
suppress_closewin=Y
couldn't get that to work either.....
in pro4.ini or in another .ini file specified using INIPATH
Hi Donald,
Thanks for the suggestions. I've tried suppress_closewin=Y and the only thing it seems to do is not allow you to close a ProIV window (i.e. a WD,WS, etc..). It doesn't seem to be related to closing the actual client program unfortunately.
Just a thought - isn't this whole discussion a little pointless? The user could
always use task manager to kill the client or network problems could kill the
connection so the p4 code needs to be robust enough to handle this situation
anyway?
jm2c
The content and views expressed in this message are those
of the poster and do not represent those of any organisation.
of the poster and do not represent those of any organisation.
#6
Donald Miller
-
- Members
-
- 205 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cupar, Fife, Scotland
- Interests:Motorcycling, Running, Cooking
Posted 24 August 2007 - 09:22 PM
Chris
You are quite correct. But some users, with the prevalence of Windows products and the use of the X to close the window, may be deterred from trying any further, if the suppress close window worked as indicated in the manual and issued a warning. Programmers wouldn't be dissauded and would use whatever means necessary to close the application but they (should) have knowledge/information that your average user doesn't.
And it would be great if the Pro IV kernel was robust enough to handle it. But in this "reality" (pardon the pun) just preventing it would be a (small) step in the right direction.
Wouldn't it?
You are quite correct. But some users, with the prevalence of Windows products and the use of the X to close the window, may be deterred from trying any further, if the suppress close window worked as indicated in the manual and issued a warning. Programmers wouldn't be dissauded and would use whatever means necessary to close the application but they (should) have knowledge/information that your average user doesn't.
And it would be great if the Pro IV kernel was robust enough to handle it. But in this "reality" (pardon the pun) just preventing it would be a (small) step in the right direction.
Wouldn't it?
Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anytthing at all
#7
Chris Mackenzie
-
- Members
-
- 372 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bristol, United Kingdom
Posted 28 August 2007 - 02:52 PM
Chris
some users, with the prevalence of Windows products and the use of the X to close the window, may be deterred from trying any further, if the suppress close window worked as indicated in the manual and issued a warning. Programmers wouldn't be dissauded and would use whatever means necessary to close the application but they (should) have knowledge/information that your average user doesn't.
And it would be great if the Pro IV kernel was robust enough to handle it. But in this "reality" (pardon the pun) just preventing it would be a (small) step in the right direction.
Wouldn't it?
Well, I think I should butt out. But. Isn't this about transactional integrity rather then
p4 kernel robustness (or otherwise)? Some maybe dissuaded by the message but
inevitably someone will kill the client. For me, if there is a red X then I'd expect it
to close the window and not to tell me I'm not allowed to close it...
The content and views expressed in this message are those
of the poster and do not represent those of any organisation.
of the poster and do not represent those of any organisation.
#8
Donald Miller
-
- Members
-
- 205 posts
ProIV Guru
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cupar, Fife, Scotland
- Interests:Motorcycling, Running, Cooking
Posted 28 August 2007 - 04:44 PM
I suppose I'm expecting too much. I was hoping that there was a flag that when set, dimmed the red X and disabled it. If the dimming wasn't available then at least preventing it from closing the client rather than showing a warning and allowing the close would have been ok.
Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anytthing at all
#9
mikelandl
-
- Members
-
- 101 posts
Expert
Posted 28 August 2007 - 07:02 PM
I suppose I'm expecting too much. I was hoping that there was a flag that when set, dimmed the red X and disabled it. If the dimming wasn't available then at least preventing it from closing the client rather than showing a warning and allowing the close would have been ok.
My thoughts exactly. Chris does have a valid point though. The code should be able to handle killed processes but that's easier said than done, especially when working with files and not a database.
#10
Anthony Hood
-
- Members
-
- 6 posts
Newbie
- Gender:Male
- Location:Colchester, United Kingdom
Posted 12 September 2007 - 09:54 AM
Not sure if you've tried setting the @XFUNCT value - i.e. @XFUNCT = 'MYFUNCT'?
This lets you specify a function to run when the close window ('X') is used.
Pro will ask the 'Do you want to terminate the PRO-IV session' question, answering 'Yes' will cause the @XFUNCT function to be executed. That way you can control what happens next - throw up a warning, re-direct to another function etc.
Obviously, it doesn't solve the CTRL-ALT-DEL / End Task way out of a session, but its a start.
This lets you specify a function to run when the close window ('X') is used.
Pro will ask the 'Do you want to terminate the PRO-IV session' question, answering 'Yes' will cause the @XFUNCT function to be executed. That way you can control what happens next - throw up a warning, re-direct to another function etc.
Obviously, it doesn't solve the CTRL-ALT-DEL / End Task way out of a session, but its a start.
#11
mikelandl
-
- Members
-
- 101 posts
Expert
Posted 12 September 2007 - 01:22 PM
Not sure if you've tried setting the @XFUNCT value - i.e. @XFUNCT = 'MYFUNCT'?
This lets you specify a function to run when the close window ('X') is used.
Pro will ask the 'Do you want to terminate the PRO-IV session' question, answering 'Yes' will cause the @XFUNCT function to be executed. That way you can control what happens next - throw up a warning, re-direct to another function etc.
Obviously, it doesn't solve the CTRL-ALT-DEL / End Task way out of a session, but its a start.
Hi Anthony,
Thanks for the suggestion. We actually have tried that with some success but at the end of the day we still have the "disconnect" option left on the file menu
#12
Rob Donovan
-
- Admin
-
- 1,652 posts
rob@proivrc.com
- Gender:Male
- Location:Spain
Posted 12 September 2007 - 02:11 PM
Hi,
If you put 'u1' in the .piv file on a seperate line, then the 'session' menu will be hidden, and they will not be able to select 'Disconnect'.
Obviously though, this doesnt stop them from killing the process....
HTHs,
Rob.
If you put 'u1' in the .piv file on a seperate line, then the 'session' menu will be hidden, and they will not be able to select 'Disconnect'.
Obviously though, this doesnt stop them from killing the process....
HTHs,
Rob.
#15
Rob Donovan
-
- Admin
-
- 1,652 posts
rob@proivrc.com
- Gender:Male
- Location:Spain
Posted 12 September 2007 - 03:37 PM
Ah, yes thanks Darren...
Got to carried away with looking into things at the lower level
Rob.
Got to carried away with looking into things at the lower level
Rob.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Click the link below to see the new game I'm developing!
