home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hermes.chpc.utexas.edu!news.utdallas.edu!feenix.metronet.com!abledsoe
- From: abledsoe@feenix.metronet.com (Alton Bledsoe)
- Subject: Re: AIX3.2 & cu
- Keywords: 3.2, cu, tty
- References: <C0qn2A.rnK@icsbelf.co.uk>
- Organization: Tx Metronet Communications Services, Dallas Tx
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:21:17 GMT
- Message-ID: <C0qynH.GIp@feenix.metronet.com>
- Lines: 36
-
- In article <C0qn2A.rnK@icsbelf.co.uk> ianm@icsbelf.co.uk (Ian Moran) writes:
- >Since moving to AIX 3.2, cu`ing to devices previously used for sucessful
- >communications now fail with the following:
- >
- >Connected
- >
- >Lost Carrier
- >User Defined Signal 1
- >
- >What has changed in 3.2 to cause this ?
- >
- > Ian
- >
- >--
- >
- >Ian Moran Internet: ianm@icsbelf.co.uk
- >ICS Computing Group Ltd. imoran@cix.compulink.co.uk
- >Belfast UUCP: ...{uknet,uunet,mcsun}!icsbelf!ianm
- >N. Ireland. Fidonet: 2:252/309.6
-
- I just ran into this change yesterday. I thought it was some dependence
- on dcd signal (Sequent once tried to tell me that this would be a posix
- compliance!) but this is not the case.
-
- If you carefully scan the manpage on 3.2 it says under the -l flag
- that a phone number MUST be included: cu -l ttyx 9=xxxxxxx.
- ^^^^
- I don't know why yet. ( Which standard will this one be ;-) )
-
- So I guess I write a dumb termio program to program modems now.
-
- Hope this helps.
- ---
- Al bledsoe abledsoe@feenix.metronet.com
- Wang Western Support Center abb@drsc.lonestar.wang.com
- (I just started yesterday so the opinions haven't really formed yet.)
-