[comp.sys.amiga] vt100 v2.9

smaug@eneevax.UUCP (Kurt Lidl) (10/02/88)

	I seem to remember seeing a message a couple of months ago stating
that vt100 v2.9 was soon to be released to the teeming masses.  As of yet,
I have not seen hide nor hair of it.  Am I mis-remembering something,
or did I just miss the introduction of this software?

	Thanks, Kurt

-- 
==================================================================
==  Kurt J. Lidl  (smaug@eneevax.umd.edu)	(301)454-3184	==
==  UUCP: [seismo,allegra]!umcp-cs!eneevax!smaug		==
========"It's after 3am, no point in going to sleep now..."=======

acs@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Tony Sumrall) (10/04/88)

In article <1805@eneevax.UUCP> smaug@eneevax.umd.edu.UUCP (Kurt Lidl) writes:
>
>	I seem to remember seeing a message a couple of months ago stating
>that vt100 v2.9 was soon to be released to the teeming masses.  As of yet,
>I have not seen hide nor hair of it.  Am I mis-remembering something,
>or did I just miss the introduction of this software?

No, you didn't miss it.  My paying job began making more demands on my
time than I'd anticipated (yeah, I thought it was pretty thoughtless of
them, too :-) so things haven't been moving as quickly as I'd like them
to move.  Never fear, 2.9 is alive and well but, alas, at least a month
from Beta testing.  If all works out right (and things let up a bit here
at work) it should be available in aboutg 6 weeks.

BTW, the patch version of 2.8A (fixes the GURU when trying to do a Kermit
BYE without ever getting into Kermit) has been with the moderators at
comp.{sources,binaries}.amiga for several months now.  Maybe I oughta get
a copy to the alt.sources people.  I'll try to do that this week.

Sorry for the delay.

>	Thanks, Kurt
>==  Kurt J. Lidl  (smaug@eneevax.umd.edu)	(301)454-3184	==
>==  UUCP: [seismo,allegra]!umcp-cs!eneevax!smaug		==

-- 
Tony Sumrall acs@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com <=> amdahl!acs

[ Opinions expressed herein are the author's and should not be construed
  to reflect the views of Amdahl Corp. ]

dbk@fbog.UUCP (Dave B. Kinzer @ Price Rd. GEG) (12/15/88)

In article <686@pccuts.pcc.amdahl.com> acs@pccuts.pcc.amdahl.com (Tony Sumrall) writes:
[deletions]
>I'll do better...I promise!  2.9 *will* check and put up a message if it
>can't get memory.
[deletions]
>-- 
>Tony Sumrall acs@uts.amdahl.com <=> amdahl!acs
>
>[ Opinions expressed herein are the author's and should not be construed
>  to reflect the views of Amdahl Corp. ]

   And while you are in there fooling around with the code, if it doesn't
already, add support for a serial device with a name other than 'SER:'.
One of these days someone is going to come out with a board, then everyone
will become *really* mad.  This goes for any other software that talks
to that port also.


|     // You've heard of CATS and DOGS, I'm from GOATS, Dave Kinzer         |
|    //  Gladly Offering All Their Support!             noao!nud!fbog!dbk   |
|  \X/   "My employer's machine, my opinion."           (602) 897-3085      |

dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) (12/15/88)

Dave Kinzer <noao!nud!fbog!dbk> writes:
>   And while you are in there fooling around with the code, if it doesn't
>already, add support for a serial device with a name other than 'SER:'.
>One of these days someone is going to come out with a board, then everyone
>will become *really* mad.  This goes for any other software that talks
>to that port also.

	Mmm... terminal programs general do not use the DOS device handler
(i.e. SER:) but use the device level "serial.device".  One assumes all you
would need are options to be able to set the device name and unit number.

					-Matt

papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (12/15/88)

In article <8812150227.AA09671@postgres.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
|Dave Kinzer <noao!nud!fbog!dbk| writes:
||   And while you are in there fooling around with the code, if it doesn't
||already, add support for a serial device with a name other than 'SER:'.
||One of these days someone is going to come out with a board, then everyone
||will become *really* mad.  This goes for any other software that talks
||to that port also.
|
|	Mmm... terminal programs general do not use the DOS device handler
|(i.e. SER:) but use the device level "serial.device".  One assumes all you
|would need are options to be able to set the device name and unit number.

Version 1.0e of A-Talk III, which I shipped to OXXI last week for duplication,
supports "multiple serial ports", through different UNIT numbers.  As Matt
explains the software does:

OpenDevice(serial.device, unit);

where unit can be 0, 1,2,3, etc...

0 = "standard" serial device

1, 2, 3 = additional ports. 

The UNIT number is set in the TOOLTYPES Info as:

UNIT=x

x = number.

It is currently an "undocumented" feature [though now it's no more :=)].

So harware guys, when are we going to get multiple serial devices?
The software is ready.

-- Marco Papa 'Doc'
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
uucp:...!pollux!papa       BIX:papa       ARPAnet:pollux!papa@oberon.usc.edu
 "There's Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Diga!" -- Leo Schwab [quoting Rick Unland]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (12/15/88)

In article <8812150227.AA09671@postgres.Berkeley.EDU>, dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
> 	Mmm... terminal programs general do not use the DOS device handler
> (i.e. SER:) but use the device level "serial.device".  One assumes all you
> would need are options to be able to set the device name and unit number.

Yes, any terminal program should have options to let you specify the
device name and unit number. One of these days someone will actually come
out with a serial port card for the Amiga, and people will want to use it.

Because if you don't the guys who build the thing will implement some
horrible kludge that will turn any hope of organised and well behaved
multiple serial ports into mush.
-- 
		    Peter da Silva  `-_-'  peter@sugar.uu.net
		     Have you hugged  U  your wolf today?

	          Disclaimer: My typos are my own damn busines#!rne

peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (12/16/88)

In article <14049@oberon.USC.EDU>, papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes:
about a terminal program that lets you specify the unit number for the
serial device, but not the driver.

> So harware guys, when are we going to get multiple serial devices?
> The software is ready.

No it's NOT. "serial.device" doesn't support more than one UNIT. Another
manufacturer will have to call their driver "rs232.device" or "myserial.device"
or something like that.

Anything they do to make "serial.device" accept multiple unit numbers (map
their memory in to some magic place, for example, or patch serial.device
to their code) is going to be (as I mentioned) a horrible kludge.
-- 
		    Peter da Silva  `-_-'  peter@sugar.uu.net
		     Have you hugged  U  your wolf today?

	          Disclaimer: My typos are my own damn busines#!rne

scotty@ziggy.UUCP (Scott Drysdale) (12/16/88)

In article <3097@sugar.uu.net> peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>horrible kludge that will turn any hope of organised and well behaved
>multiple serial ports into mush.
>-- 

unfortunately, the system already has a built in "feature" <SNARL in the
general direction of the guy who spec'd/wrote serial.device> which forces
existing software to be kludgy.  there is no way to test/manipulate the
modem control and handshake lines without going directly to the hardware.

AAAAARRRGGH!  FIX IT!!

  --Scotty

barrett@ektools.UUCP (Chris Barrett) (12/16/88)

In article <3102@sugar.uu.net> peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>No it's NOT. "serial.device" doesn't support more than one UNIT. Another
>manufacturer will have to call their driver "rs232.device" or "myserial.device"
>or something like that.
>
>Anything they do to make "serial.device" accept multiple unit numbers (map
>their memory in to some magic place, for example, or patch serial.device
>to their code) is going to be (as I mentioned) a horrible kludge.
>-- 

Why can't the serial device that gets opened be part of vt100.init or 
what ever terminal program .init file for example:

In vt100.init:

SERIAL_DEVICE		serial.device		# Amiga serial port

or

SERIAL_DEVICE		rs2321.device		# external serial port 1

in vt100 source file:

	OpenDevice (SERIAL_DEVICE, ....);

This way the user can customise the program relatively easily.  If he wants
to be able to switch ports, or run multiple vt100 sessions, the create a script
file that sets the user to a directory that contains a vt100.init for the port
that they specify for example:

Directory structure:

s:	
	vt100.init	vt100.1	<dir>	vt100.2 <dir>

vt100.1:

	vt100.init	

vt100.2:

	vt100.init


Script file: vt100.1

cd s:vt100.1
run vt100

Script file: vt100.2

cd s:vt100.2
run vt100

In the vt100.init file in the vt100.1 directory opens the external serial port
1, in the vt100.2 directory, it opens external serial port 2, a regular vt100
invocation will use the vt100.init in the s: directory.  Sound easy?

Chris

rochester!kodak!ektools!barrett
barrett@ektools

keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (12/20/88)

In article <3097@sugar.uu.net> peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>Yes, any terminal program should have options to let you specify the
>device name and unit number. One of these days someone will actually come
>out with a serial port card for the Amiga, and people will want to use it.
>
>Because if you don't the guys who build the thing will implement some
>horrible kludge that will turn any hope of organised and well behaved
>multiple serial ports into mush.

You mean like with an ASSIGN SER: COM1:  ?  :-)

Keith Doyle
#  mail path under construction

peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (12/22/88)

In article <2318@cadovax.UUCP>, keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
> In article <3097@sugar.uu.net> peter@sugar.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >Yes, any terminal program should have options to let you specify the
> >device name and unit number. One of these days someone will actually come
> >out with a serial port card for the Amiga, and people will want to use it.

> >Because if you don't the guys who build the thing will implement some
> >horrible kludge that will turn any hope of organised and well behaved
> >multiple serial ports into mush.

> You mean like with an ASSIGN SER: COM1:  ?  :-)

Won't work. If you want to use the serial device at all effectively you
have to open "serial.device" with unit=0. You can't go via the handler...
there's just so much that you can't get to. Yes, this is unfortunate. It's
the result of layering a mess like DOS on top of the Amiga Exec.

I thought of this one, too, about a year ago. It just doesn't work.
-- 
Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva  `-_-'  peter@sugar.uu.net