Terminal window buggy output

Hello,

I am trying to use the backgrounding tools on one of my clients to transfer a 50GB file over ftp so I don’t have to go on site to get the file, however I am unable to do so. When trying ftp from the terminal prompt (both cmd and powershell), the output is buggy and I am unable to get the proper commands in. Below is an example of the output I receive. Normally once you connect, you’re prompted for a username and password, but this seems to just leave the previous command on the line and appears to be delayed a few commands. Any thoughts on this one?

I know I can transfer files with splashtop, but given the size of this file, I’d prefer to not have to keep a remote session open for 1+ days. Thanks!

Frank

syncro_terminal

2 Likes

Even if you were able to login to ftp using Back Ground tools, you would need to keep the Background Tools open for as long as it took for the 50 GB of data to upload. Windows doesn’t have screen like linux does, therefore as soon as the Background Tools session closes, your ftp transfer will die.

You would be better off installing Putty on the remote machine and then scripting psftp and using task scheduler to trigger that script.

I appreciate the suggestion, thank you. I have no issue keeping the backgrounding tools on in this case, but it still doesn’t explain why the terminal window is acting the way it is. Seems like something that should be looked at regardless.

True.
Agree, it should behave that way.
You will likely need to log a support ticket for any improvement to occur.

1 Like

I have seem cmd shell weirdness from time to time. changing directories and executing commands, occasionaly it looks like its not accepted the input but in actual fact it has but the text has not been updated.

Syncro acquired the Background Tools code base from a 3rd party and doesn’t seem to want to/capable of putting effort into improving it or integrating it into the rest of the platform, so I wouldn’t expect this to improve. It may get replaced with something else at some point. I would suggest going about this some other way, I’d probably just upload it to my webhost or onedrive/dropbox and then paste the url in to download with powershell or wget or whatever.

2 Likes

There are no plans to replace any of our backgrounding tools.

Should I log a formal issue about this?

I logged a formal issue in Aug 2021 about terminal problems like this, including this screen capture for repro:
2021-07-30 Syncro Terminal ping doesn't work

Ticket #68905 response was: “At this time this is a limitation of the software. / I am going to forward the feedback to the team to resurface this, however, there is no ETA or a guaranteed feature build.”

This is much what they’ve said to every single issue report, and you can guess what the follow-through has been. I’ve given up.

I have noticed the same behaviour, shame, because it is a valuable tool.

I believe this is because it needs to collect the output before sending it back to the web, and when you -t a ping command it will never complete the output by design, so it won’t be displayed. This is also why if you do a ping without the -t you won’t see four individual lines appear, you’ll see them appear as a group.

So, what I am gathering from this is that the terminal windows really isn’t helpful for any interactive commands? Rather, it’s designed to work with commands that are run > execute > end? It really won’t work for anything such as telnet, ftp, etc? And maybe will work for ping, tracert and netstat once they complete?

I have to be honest, I haven’t had much luck with it for even basic commands. And it seems like a ticket already exists for the same issue, which RobE mentioned.

Yep, if the command never ends I don’t believe you’d see output. I’d have to test and confirm, but I believe that’s how it works.

This sounds like SyncroMSP is saying “that there is nothing we can do, it is the way it is, move along citizen”
This isn’t proactive.
The SimpleHelp terminal works better, than the SyncroMSP terminal and therefore improvements to the SyncroMSP terminal are obviously possible
Recording #16 (screencast-o-matic.com)

This isn’t saying that all. It’s just saying this is how it works today. It also means the behavior being described above isn’t a bug. Having it behave differently would be a feature request, which is how anything comes about that we currently don’t do today.

Seems our definitions of bugs are different.

For what it is worth here is how I usually determine a bug vs feature request.
Where the current behaviour deviates from the reasonible expected behaviour of the people using a feature, and importantly the current behaviour is not explained in the UI of the app or in the documentation of an app, then the current behaviour is a bug.

Putting aside how this is classified, how far away can we reasonibly expect improvements to the SyncroMSP background tools terminal feature.

1 Like

Well put AndrewD.

It is reasonable to expect the CMD prompt to behave like it does on a physical machine with some caveats eg cant run a DOS progam.

However I find even simple things like doing a DIR as you work your way navigating to a directory, the output gets mangled / the command prompt disappers / the last command is still there even though it sussessfully executed it.

That being said, I use it daily irrespective of its quirks and could not run my MSP business without it. I would like it to be better behaved and one less source of irritation in my day.

2 Likes

This would be no different than any other feature request. It gets prioritized based on the number of requests, what priorities we are currently working on/toward, and if we already had plans to work in any given area of the platform (sometimes it’s more efficient to tackle multiple things in the same area of the code at the same time).

That said, this functionality has worked in this fashion since it was introduced over 4 years ago, and we’ve seen only a handful of requests around making changes here. So it’s not too likely it happens in the near future.

Thanks @Andy
Sounds like it is best we all assume there will be no change to the current terminal behaviour and instead

  1. put up with the current behaviour
    OR
  2. use alternative tools such as SimpleHelp when we want to do serious SysAdmin work on the command line.

I’d suggest adding this to the feature request forum and seeing how many folks support it. In the near term, I wouldn’t expect any changes here.