Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!thumper.cc.utexas.edu!not-for-mail From: vax@thumper.cc.utexas.edu (Vax) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: Slcompress -- enforce HW flow-control, patch Date: 10 Jul 1993 16:56:35 -0500 Organization: The University of Texas - Austin Lines: 15 Message-ID: <21nduj$g4a@thumper.cc.utexas.edu> References: <21f6er$2v7@max.in-berlin.de> <21ffi4$i46@sylvester.cc.utexas.edu> <21hgue$5fg@max.in-berlin.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: thumper.cc.utexas.edu In article <21hgue$5fg@max.in-berlin.de> berry@max.IN-Berlin.DE (Stefan Behrens) writes: >You mix up two things. The device names `cua01' and `ttyd1' for the >same device have nothing to do with the flow stuff. `cua0?' is the >port for callouts (tip(1) or uucico(8)), `ttyd?' is for incoming calls >(getty(8)). No, I'm not mixing them up, they use the same device on most systems (call ins and call outs) and so if one is locked and the other is not there can be conflicts. This situation in particular is not a good example, but when people have, say, links from /dev/lp to /dev/lpt if two programs use the different names there will be contention problems still. I was talking of the more general case. -- Protect our endangered bandwidth - reply by email. NO BIG SIGS! VaX#n8 vax@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu - finger for more info if you even care.