A Challenge

A Challenge

Post by Richard Pat » Mon, 11 Apr 1994 23:36:26



Has anyone got bidirectional serial ports going with x86?  Does anyone know whether SUN recognises that it's broken?  Is there a patch?  

I have read and performed as per Celleste's excellent guide, but still once I have
configured and enabled the monitor, I cannot dial out.  To add insult to injury, the *y thing doesn't give me a login when I dial in either! (On the protocol analyser, I can see the CD go up, but no login message).

The port works fine as a dial out (disable the bidirectional stuff).  If there is some magic in STTY settings, I have yet to find it.

---
Richard Paton

 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by Richard Pat » Tue, 12 Apr 1994 20:13:57


Oops,

I apologise for impuning Sun's good name by suggesting that bidirectional modem
control didn't work on x86.  I have got it to work by removing the module-load
declaration from:

pmadm -a -p rpmon -s tty$PORT -i root -v `ttyadm -V` -fu -m \
"`ttyadm -b -d /dev/term/$PORT -s /usr/bin/login -l  $TTYSPEED \
-S n -m ldterm,ttcompat`" -y "dial in/out on serial port"
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

making it

pmadm -a -p rpmon -s tty$PORT -i root -v `ttyadm -V` -fu -m \
"`ttyadm -b -d /dev/term/$PORT -s /usr/bin/login -l  $TTYSPEED \
-S n `" -y "dial in/out on serial port"

If you don't do this, it won't work.  Perhaps the answerbook could be fixed instead.

---
Richard Paton


 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by James Stevens - SunSoft Support Contract » Wed, 13 Apr 1994 00:05:47


There is a patch to fix the serial ports on x86 to correct hardware flow control, 101196-01 : modem control, ioctls fail and does not set errno.

However, another logged problem :-
*****
1150795  asy    N/A        x86                                    12/01/93
Description:  Bi-directional modems not working on X86
Status 12/02/93:  Rono has been assigned
Status 12/09/93:  Working with customer to replicate problem
Status 12/17/93:  Still having problems replicating it.
Status 01/13/94:  Ron and John Stossel are scheduled to go to customer site
                  next week to look at problem.
Status 01/20/94:  Closed as not a Bug

*****
It seems that this is not a bug but an installation problem.


Quote:> Has anyone got bidirectional serial ports going with x86?  Does anyone know whether SUN recognises that it's broken?  Is there a patch?  
> I have read and performed as per Celleste's excellent guide, but still once I have
> configured and enabled the monitor, I cannot dial out.  To add insult to injury, the *y thing doesn't give me a login when I dial in either! (On the protocol analyser, I can see the CD go up, but no login message).
> The port works fine as a dial out (disable the bidirectional stuff).  If there is some magic in STTY settings, I have yet to find it.

> ---
> Richard Paton

 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by World I » Wed, 13 Apr 1994 13:59:05



>Has anyone got bidirectional serial ports going with x86?  Does anyone know
> whether SUN recognises that it's broken?  Is there a patch?  
> ...

Hi Richard,

I think that sloppy serial ports are one of those things that sun is in
self denial over. (Like the cursor tur-dettes, some `little' problems
have always been there, probably aways will be...)

I did add a patch, 101196, which I thought was supposed to add modem flow
control. It didn't _appear_ to because I had tremendous problems receiving
files via uucp. And, as you point out, I couldn't take incoming calls.

I did create the port monitor with a script from the faq and it did work
okay for outgoing calls except there was no flow control, BUT ...

Using Sun's uucp, a downstream partner kept telling me I was sending half
empty packets! (G protocol, 2048 bytes) I never heard of such a thing, (but
that doesn't mean much. :-) And when receiving, I got packet read errors
almost all the time.

God, do I feel good! I have completely trashed x86's serial driver and uucp
and replaced them with a Digiboard 2Port and Taylor uucp and FINALLY I

EVERYTHING WORKS!

Even my port monitor works bi-direcitionally now!

Spending more money may not be the answer that you want to hear, but none
of it went to Sun! I payed low 200's for the 2port board and FTP'd the
driver from Digi ... I net-surfed for Taylor, that was free.

BTW: On my UnixWare box, I installed the freeware SAS 16550 serial drivers,
they seem to work well (to about 38.4k, anyway,) but I haven't found a port
of that package to x86...

When I installed Taylor uucp, I started sending `full' packets and my
downstream partner at speeds up to 2000 bytes/second, basically
his full DTE speed. (The 2port board claims to be good up to 115 kilobaud,
but I've nothing yet to test that claim.)

There maybe more patches-etc for all these problems but it has been
_extremely_ difficult for me to get any stuff from Sun.

In print, Sun is really pushing the new x86 release. I hope it lives up
to half of the press. But reading all the posts from the 2.3 guys over
the past months, I know I won't be first on my block to update ...

 - Ed.

--
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
  Ed Taychert   | Disclaimer:  I pay for the machine, I pay for the

 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by David Holla » Fri, 15 Apr 1994 21:55:52


<Large amounts of stuff about x86's pile for serial I/O deleted>

Quote:>In print, Sun is really pushing the new x86 release. I hope it lives up
>to half of the press. But reading all the posts from the 2.3 guys over
>the past months, I know I won't be first on my block to update ...

IMHO, If your running 2.1 for x86, I would be very very quick to
upgrade to 2.4.  The fix for the "lets overwrite the partition table when we
kernel panic" bug is a good reason by itself. (Yah, there's a Sun patch for it,
anyone know where I can find it with out a support contract? I didn't think so.)

> - Ed.
>--
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Ed Taychert   | Disclaimer:  I pay for the machine, I pay for the


David Holland

--
David Holland

Tonights forcast: Increasing dark, with dark continuing through out the night.

 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by Seth Tis » Sat, 16 Apr 1994 07:46:19


I have pulled several different Solaris xv binaries off several places
on the net and all of them segmentation fault when I run them with
the "-nopos" option (which I want to do because xv and tvtwm don't
interact well otherwise). Is this some idiosyncrasy with my machine,
or does everyone else have the same problem?

--

 
 
 

A Challenge

Post by Richard M. Mathe » Fri, 22 Apr 1994 05:35:27



>I did add a patch, 101196, which I thought was supposed to add modem flow
>control. It didn't _appear_ to because I had tremendous problems receiving
>files via uucp. And, as you point out, I couldn't take incoming calls.

Besides the modem control problems, 2.1 suffered from serious performance
problems in the serial driver.  It couldn't keep up with even moderate
speeds.  These bugs have been fixed in 2.4.

     Richard M. Mathews                 D efend
                                         E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian

 
 
 

1. James Zepeda... I challenge you! (was Re: The OS flavor challenge!)

: Oh how I love your unbiased opinion.  Just because Microsoft has some
: incredible marketing skills, and a nice face to a really horrid operating
: system, which in many ways is more than MacOS will ever be, doesn't mean
: it "tastes like warm cow piss..".  I just love how you glorify your Linux,
: and make everything else look pale or inedible in comparison.  You realize
: that just about anybody could pick apart any argument you have for Linux,
: and your blind faith in Linux & Linus is nothing more than childliek
: stupidity don't you?

Oh, you stepped into it now, boy-oh!!!

Questions:

1.)  This was posted to c.o.l.a... my negative views on Windows was
     seen by Linux users, and trollers.  Who the fsck cares what you
     think?

2.)  If you think you can out-argue me, then why don't you?  Probably
     because you have seen how stupid I have made so many other NT
     ranters look.

Tell you what, James.  You pick a topic to argue about, and I will
argue.  Your choice... I don't care.  In other words...

I ACCEPT YOUR CHALLENGE!  Now, you have to put up or shut up,
because I am crossposting this, so that I can show the others
what a fool you are acting like.
--
QUOTE:  Some people steppeth, where they should not.

------------------------------------------------------------------
[JA207030-TRON-RAM-FLYNN] <- leave this line in your e-mail reply

2. makefiles

3. JOB: US-MN Unix System Admin Manager--- Up to $80k ----UNIX/HP/AIX Daily Challenges ! !

4. What packets cause pppd to establish a connection using the demand option?

5. The 1.44M Web Challenge

6. Anybody using PHIGS ?

7. Profitability of Linux being a challenge

8. NTL + Linux

9. A Unique Challenge

10. DES Challenge.

11. term(inal) challenge: Mutt, SecureCRT, and color

12. X11 / TVTWM Challenge

13. Challenge-response programs