vch@attibr.UUCP (Vincent C. Hatem) (08/05/88)
Has anyone out there ever got the dial(3C) function call to work??? I've got a 3B2/600 running SysVr3.1.1 here, which comes with HDB uucp. This crazy dial() call uses the old style uucp files, which I've re-created. (Why be consistant???) It seems that no matter what I tell it, it returns an error code indicating that the device I specify is unknown. But - it should be known... Can anyone please help???? Any ideas/examples would be MUCH appreciated... Vince Hatem AT&T International attibr!vch (201) 953-8030
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (08/05/88)
In article <28@attibr.UUCP> vch@attibr.UUCP (Vincent C. Hatem) writes: >Has anyone out there ever got the dial(3C) function call to work??? > >I've got a 3B2/600 running SysVr3.1.1 here, which comes with HDB uucp. > >This crazy dial() call uses the old style uucp files, which I've re-created. >(Why be consistant???) > Even if it did work it would also use the old-style uucp lock files which would not be consistant with uucp and cu. There should be something to this effect in the release notes (i.e. "Oh, by the way, dial() doesn't work"). I ran into the same problem several years ago and got a working dial.o from the hot-line people. Hard to believe that AT&T still has not fixed this in the C library. Well, maybe not so hard to believe, just depressing.... Les Mikesell
wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) (08/06/88)
In article <6213@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: >In article <28@attibr.UUCP> vch@attibr.UUCP (Vincent C. Hatem) writes: >>Has anyone out there ever got the dial(3C) function call to work??? >> >>I've got a 3B2/600 running SysVr3.1.1 here, which comes with HDB uucp. >> >>This crazy dial() call uses the old style uucp files, which I've re-created. >>(Why be consistant???) >> > >Even if it did work it would also use the old-style uucp lock files >which would not be consistant with uucp and cu. ... There is a p.d. re-implementation of dial(3) in the comp.sources.unix archives, which presumably could be hacked to support HDB-style support and lock files (or has somebody already done this? Please speak up!). It also provides more modem flexibility thru a "dialinfo" database. -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp%dcs@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
jfh@rpp386.UUCP (John F. Haugh II) (08/07/88)
In article <28@attibr.UUCP> vch@attibr.UUCP (Vincent C. Hatem) writes: >Has anyone out there ever got the dial(3C) function call to work??? > >I've got a 3B2/600 running SysVr3.1.1 here, which comes with HDB uucp. > >This crazy dial() call uses the old style uucp files, which I've re-created. >(Why be consistant???) > >It seems that no matter what I tell it, it returns an error code indicating >that the device I specify is unknown. But - it should be known... > >Can anyone please help???? two dial(3C) replacements have been posted to the net. one is simply a dialer. i believe it is in volume 6, issues 86 through 88. a second dial(3C) replacement is a thing i wrote and posted. it is in volume 13, issue 59. however, that version is currently out of date and needs much work, which has been performed. send your requests, and if there are enough, i'll repost the new version complete with bug fixes (and some support for bi-directional logins!!!) -- John F. Haugh II +--------- Cute Chocolate Quote --------- HASA, "S" Division | "USENET should not be confused with UUCP: killer!rpp386!jfh | something that matters, like CHOCOLATE" DOMAIN: jfh@rpp386.uucp | -- apologizes to Dennis O'Connor
haugj@pigs.UUCP (Joe Bob Willie) (08/09/88)
In article <28@attibr.UUCP> vch@attibr.UUCP (Vincent C. Hatem) writes: >Has anyone out there ever got the dial(3C) function call to work??? > >I've got a 3B2/600 running SysVr3.1.1 here, which comes with HDB uucp. > >This crazy dial() call uses the old style uucp files, which I've re-created. >(Why be consistant???) > >It seems that no matter what I tell it, it returns an error code indicating >that the device I specify is unknown. But - it should be known... > >Can anyone please help???? i've received five or six requests for my modemcap thing, so i will be sharing it up and mailing it off to rich $alz. depending on his current backlog, plus the delay in my getting it out, it should show up in comp.sources.unix in the next few weeks. i'll also go ahead and make a copy available for anonymous uucp, so watch comp.sources.d for that announcement. alas, my code also uses the old style uucp files and has conditional compilation for old style lock files. an improvement since last release is the addition of primitive support for bi-directional modem lines. (it finds the getty, creates the lock, then nukes the getty off ;-) -- jfh@rpp386.uucp (The Beach Bum at The Big "D" Home for Wayward Hackers) "Never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity" -- Hanlon's Razor