QuickSynergy

[Liam Proven]

On 3 June 2014 00:02, Rick Stevens <ricks at alldigital.com> wrote:
> If you don't specify the server's IP address to the client, then the
> client will probably be trying to connect over the OTHER network, and
> no, that won't work.


Success!

It was the firewall in the end; Synergy's error message is misleading.
It says "no route to host", but there is a route, it's just that
nobody's able to listen.

Procedure, in case it helps anyone:

[1] I moved the 2nd machine onto a different network port, getting it
on the same subnet. No difference.

[2] I investigated why I had this 2nd network interface, virbr0:

http://nixcraft.com/showthread.php/15760-Remove-Virtual-Interface

So I got rid of it:

http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/linux-kvm-disable-virbr0-nat-interface/

No difference. Rebooted, still no difference.

[3] I checked out that there _was_ a route. There was. No hops, 2
machines on same 10.x.y.z subnet. I even added a hostname to
/etc/hosts. No difference.

[4] So then I thought the "no route to host" message must be spurious,
and finally Googled it.

https://ask.fedoraproject.org/en/question/42001/synergy-no-route-to-host-but-i-can-ping-from-terminal/

And this post is correct. Although there are no firewall rules visible
in the GUI, they _are_ there and the port _was_ being blocked.

Open the port and it worked instantly.

-- 
Liam Proven * Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk * GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com * Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell: +44 7939-087884