Linked by HAL2001 on Wed 13th Jul 2011 22:37 UTC
Internet & Networking "After four long years, here comes a new version of PuTTY, the popular free telnet/SSH client for Windows and Unix platforms. PuTTY 0.61 brings new features, bug fixes, and compatibility updates for Windows 7 and various SSH server software. The new version supports SSH-2 authentication using GSSAPI, on both Windows and Unix. Users in a Kerberos realm should now be able to use their existing Kerberos single sign-on in their PuTTY SSH connections."
Order by: Score:
Wow
by WorknMan on Thu 14th Jul 2011 00:03 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

And I thought this project was dead. After 4 years, you would think they would have added more features (such as tabbed windows and some scripting capabilities), but I guess when it's free, beggars can't be choosers ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Wow
by zlynx on Thu 14th Jul 2011 06:51 UTC in reply to "Wow"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

I'm not surprised it seemed dead.

After all, who wants to mess with perfection?

It's open source, so apparently no one cared enough to fork the project to make their own updated versions. Although I believe there are at least a couple of PuTTY forks with integrated MUD clients. PowTTY, for one.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Wow
by nimble on Thu 14th Jul 2011 07:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Wow"
nimble Member since:
2005-07-06

It's open source, so apparently no one cared enough to fork the project to make their own updated versions.


Are you kidding? PuTTY is one of the most frequently forked software projects around. The PuTTY developers actually maintain a list:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/links.html

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Wow
by zlynx on Thu 14th Jul 2011 08:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wow"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

I guess I didn't explain myself as clearly as is obviously required on the Internet.

By the strictest interpretation I guess you can call those "forks" of PuTTY.

I don't see any of those as PuTTY forks because none of them have tried to replace PuTTY as the big SSH client on Windows.

Some of them implement cute little features like transparency, preferences in files or 64-bit support. But that's nothing like Ethereal vs. Wireshark, OpenBSD vs. FreeBSD, X.Org vs. XFree.

None of the "forks" tried to implement any big features demanded by lots of former PuTTY users. This didn't happen because mainline PuTTY was meeting almost everyone's needs.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Wow
by kevstev on Thu 14th Jul 2011 13:40 UTC in reply to "Wow"
kevstev Member since:
2011-07-14

Are you aware of putty connection manager? Its quite buggy, but it offers tabs. And also, if you aren't familiar with the screen Linux utility, you should. Tabbed windows are pretty, but screen keeps your session alive even if your connection drops, and allows you to reconnect to your session from a different box- very useful when you want to log in from home, or frequently switch locations.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Wow
by phoenix on Thu 14th Jul 2011 16:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Wow"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

tmux is much nicer to use than screen, and doesn't mangle your TERM settings like screen does.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Wow
by f0dder on Thu 14th Jul 2011 19:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Wow"
f0dder Member since:
2009-08-05

Screen is nice (even if I prefer tmux), but that doesn't really help when you connect to multiple servers.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Wow
by WorknMan on Thu 14th Jul 2011 22:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wow"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Screen is nice (even if I prefer tmux), but that doesn't really help when you connect to multiple servers.


Exactly. If I have to connect to 8 different servers at once (as I often do), it would be nice to have tabs. Of course, SecureCRT would be great, but my company would never fork over a license for it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Wow
by evert on Fri 15th Jul 2011 09:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wow"
evert Member since:
2005-07-06
RE[3]: Wow
by nimble on Fri 15th Jul 2011 09:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wow"
nimble Member since:
2005-07-06

Screen is nice (even if I prefer tmux), but that doesn't really help when you connect to multiple servers.


Unless you run Screen on your local machine (with Cygwin).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Wow
by orestes on Fri 15th Jul 2011 12:53 UTC in reply to "Wow"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

It's not surprising really, fits perfectly with the old school UNIX philosophy of small tools that do one thing and do it extremely well.

Reply Score: 2

How about a decent terminal window
by MacMan on Thu 14th Jul 2011 01:09 UTC
MacMan
Member since:
2006-11-19

Whilst I have not used Windows since XP, one of my biggest complaints about it was the absolutely horrid terminal window. It can not be re-sized, window border would not accept any XP border themes, fixed width fonts, so forth.

So has anyone ever developed a decent terminal window for Windows, something approaching an xterm? Is the terminal any better in newer versions of Windows?

Reply Score: 3

cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

I believe what you want is powershell however it is crappy in other ways like being object oriented and highly bloated ... makes you say eeww waht kinda shell is this X.x


cmd.exe is sorta becoming depreciated

Reply Score: 0

jptros Member since:
2005-08-26

No, and seriously? It's crappy because it's object oriented? Durrh. Ok.

Powershell runs in the same console window as cmd.exe and suffers from the same visual limitations.

Reply Score: 4

malxau Member since:
2005-12-04

Whilst I have not used Windows since XP, one of my biggest complaints about it was the absolutely horrid terminal window. It can not be re-sized, window border would not accept any XP border themes, fixed width fonts, so forth.

So has anyone ever developed a decent terminal window for Windows, something approaching an xterm? Is the terminal any better in newer versions of Windows?


This is why Putty doesn't use Windows console window. It implements its own, from scratch, that doesn't have any of the limitations you mention. Of course, it can only host a remote SSH session, not a local console application.

People have tried to build different consoles for Windows console applications but architecturally this is very hard. The Windows console is a very special beast - it's a separate subsystem that hosts binaries tagged to use it. In the past replacing console meant injecting code into console processes and hooking their system calls, which is obviously not a 'supported' solution.

If you want to try one, see http://sourceforge.net/projects/console/

Reply Score: 4

nimble Member since:
2005-07-06

There's mintty, an xterm-compatible terminal for Cygwin (and MSYS) with a native Windows UI. Based on PuTTY's terminal emulation, but with quite a few enhancements.

http://mintty.googlecode.com

Reply Score: 2

SaschaW Member since:
2007-07-19

I am using mintty which comes with cygwin. It behaves like PuTTY mostly. Resizing, etc. works very well. Plus you will also have a bash4 shell. Native Windows applications can still be started as you normally would using the CMD shell.

Of course there is also PowerShell, which I am not very familiar with.

Reply Score: 1

Copy & paste
by Morph on Thu 14th Jul 2011 02:15 UTC
Morph
Member since:
2007-08-20

Still no option for native copy & paste behaviour on Windows...

Reply Score: 0

RE: Copy & paste
by Laurence on Thu 14th Jul 2011 08:31 UTC in reply to "Copy & paste"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Still no option for native copy & paste behaviour on Windows...

The settings can be changed in Window -> Selection and has been there for years.

However if you want [Ctrl]+[C] / [Ctrl]+[V] then you're going to be out of luck as they're console control characters. The former being a pretty vital one too.

Edited 2011-07-14 08:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Copy & paste
by aargh on Thu 14th Jul 2011 09:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Copy & paste"
aargh Member since:
2009-10-12

Why wouldn't you just use the standard Ctrl-Shift-Ins / Ctrl-Ins? Ctrl

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Copy & paste
by Laurence on Thu 14th Jul 2011 10:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Copy & paste"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Why wouldn't you just use the standard Ctrl-Shift-Ins / Ctrl-Ins? Ctrl

You mean [ctrl]+[ins] / [shift]+[ins] ?

I guess that could work. Never tried.

Personally I do most my copy/pasting from Vi (thus use Vi's commands) when in PuTTY, so I can't really say I've struggled with it's default options like the opening poster has.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Copy & paste
by Morph on Fri 15th Jul 2011 00:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Copy & paste"
Morph Member since:
2007-08-20

I mean, the unix-style behaviour of automatically copying as soon as you make a selection. Sometimes it is handy to select a region to make it more readable in negative colours, or as a marker to refer back to. But as soon as you make a selection, it is copied to the clipboard, overwriting any previous clipboard content. This might be common behaviour on unix, but it is not on Windows. I'd like to see an option for manual copying via the context menu.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Copy & paste
by nimble on Fri 15th Jul 2011 09:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Copy & paste"
nimble Member since:
2005-07-06

Fwiw, copy-on-select is optional (but enabled by default) in Cygwin's mintty. Also, it also doesn't clear the selection when something is copied into the clipboard elsewhere.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Copy & paste
by zlynx on Thu 14th Jul 2011 08:50 UTC in reply to "Copy & paste"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

I'm surprised you missed the copy and paste settings.

The very first thing I do with a new program is poke around all of its option menus.

Reply Score: 2

Cool... I like PuTTY.
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 14th Jul 2011 06:14 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

On Windows, PuTTY is an awesome tool. On UNIX/Linux, though, I'm sort of lost as to what its purpose is with OpenSSH available... the GUI I guess, vs. command line with text config files [which, I might add, is well commented and requires very few adjustments by default]? In fact, I didn't even know there *was* a UNIX version of PuTTY, assuming that there probably wasn't one because it's just not needed there when we've got the source... OpenSSH... available in most distros. It's cool that it's there, though. Either way, I thought the project was dead. Glad to find out that it's still alive and well, it's a great program.

I don't have two machines up and running to try out PuTTY on Linux, but I installed it through Debian's package manager and... what can I say, it brings back memories. Memories of my first times logging directly into my Linux machines from Windows, which for me at the time was quite an accomplishment. And very rewarding, I might add.

Edited 2011-07-14 06:27 UTC

Reply Score: 2

KiTTY
by evert on Thu 14th Jul 2011 11:46 UTC
evert
Member since:
2005-07-06

A very nice "fork" or extension of Putty is KiTTY. It is based on Putty, but has a number of extra's, like...

- Hyperlinks in the terminal are clickable.

- WinSCP integration, so it's easy to open a FTP like windows for transferring files.

- ZModem support (like LePutty) with sz and rz so you can transfer files over SSH (no SCP).

- PuTTYCyg, so you have a nice terminal window to your own Cygwin installation.

- Storage of profiles (connection lists) in the filesystem instead of the registry.

And lots of other goodies. For a full list, visit their website:

http://www.9bis.net/kitty/?page=Welcome&zone=en

Hopefully, they will update their core with the new Putty version soon.

For ueberpower, you want to install Launchy and get the Putty plugin for Launchy. Then, configure it to use Kitty, and there you go to whatever server you like with only a few keypresses.

Reply Score: 3

0.x as a version for PuTTY?
by wigry on Thu 14th Jul 2011 12:37 UTC
wigry
Member since:
2008-10-09

Hmm, haven't bothered to look up the version of Putty so after 10+ years of use of very very stable software, I'm baffled that the version number is 0.61 (!) Looks more like a broken beta software in active development.

Either declare it 1.0 or better yet, drop the 0. prefix altogether and declare it PuTTY 61.

I mean, It is very stable and rocksolid software and I have zero complaints over years. The 0.61 version number is ridiculous.

Reply Score: 1

Common misused word
by Drunkula on Thu 14th Jul 2011 18:37 UTC
Drunkula
Member since:
2009-09-03

depreciated != deprecated

I see this far too often. I usually don't bag on typos but this one just gets my goat. Sort of like not using the words to, too, and two. [roll eyes]

Reply Score: 2