john@wa3wbu.UUCP (John Gayman) (02/07/88)
I am running Honeydanber UUCP on Microport 2.3U. I recently
installed it in preparation of installing a Telebit Trailblazer modem.
I was depressed to find after attempting to install the modem that the
version of HDB that they provide does not recognize the Dialers file.
This makes installing the modem a pain. One must hack the expect/send
sequences in Systems to config the modem for each call. I've waded
through this and have the modem working fine. But this "feature" of
this version of HDB makes changes and system additions needlessly
complex. With the Dialers file, its much simpler.
Does anyone know of a newer version of HDB for Microport thats
updated to utilize Dialers ???
John
--
John Gayman, WA3WBU | UUCP: uunet!wa3wbu!john
1869 Valley Rd. | ARPA: wa3wbu!john@uunet.UU.NET
Marysville, PA 17053 | Packet: WA3WBU @ AK3P lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) (02/09/88)
It seems to me that HDB still uses /usr/lib/uucp/Dialers. All you
should have to do is create an entry in dialers for the telebit
(see dialers(5) in the programmers manual). Note that you would need
to do this anyway if you want cu(1) to be able to dial the modem.
Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of
cu, or if there's a difference?
--lyndon {alberta,utzoo}!ncc!lyndonlyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) (02/09/88)
In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > > It seems to me that HDB still uses /usr/lib/uucp/Dialers. All you ^^^^^^^ > should have to do is create an entry in dialers for the telebit > (see dialers(5) in the programmers manual). Note that you would need > to do this anyway if you want cu(1) to be able to dial the modem. > > Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of > cu, or if there's a difference? > > --lyndon {alberta,utzoo}!ncc!lyndon Naturally, I meant to say '/usr/lib/uucp/dialinfo' is used by HDB...
john@wa3wbu.UUCP (John Gayman) (02/11/88)
In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > > It seems to me that HDB still uses /usr/lib/uucp/Dialers. All you > should have to do is create an entry in dialers for the telebit The problem is that Microport's release of HDB does *not* support the Dialers file. You can set one up but it will not use it. I got a big suprize when I hooked up my Telebit, edited the Dialers file and tried it! This has been more or less confirmed from Microport. They are considering porting the 386 version of HDB (which works) to the 286. Other than the Dialers file, Microports HDB works fairly well. Yes, your right, CU doesn't use the new files. To make matters worse, with the Telebit, CU wont autodial at all. This isn't too bad, the Telebit has 10-number directories and this works fine. The darn thing is saving me so much money I cant complain. :-) John . -- John Gayman, WA3WBU | UUCP: uunet!wa3wbu!john 1869 Valley Rd. | ARPA: wa3wbu!john@uunet.UU.NET Marysville, PA 17053 | Packet: WA3WBU @ AK3P
sullivan@vsi.UUCP (Michael T Sullivan) (02/12/88)
In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of > cu, or if there's a difference? The difference is that the HDB version should know how to work with uugetty. Don't know why they don't, though. All I can get out of them is "It's public domain software and we don't support it." Michael Sullivan {ucbvax | ihnp4 | sun}!amdcad!uport!vsi!sullivan {uunet | attmail}!vsi!sullivan
rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) (02/12/88)
In article <10061@tycho.UUCP> lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: >In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: >> >> It seems to me that HDB still uses /usr/lib/uucp/Dialers. All you > ^^^^^^^ >> should have to do is create an entry in dialers for the telebit >> (see dialers(5) in the programmers manual). Note that you would need >> to do this anyway if you want cu(1) to be able to dial the modem. >> >> Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of >> cu, or if there's a difference? >> >> --lyndon {alberta,utzoo}!ncc!lyndon > >Naturally, I meant to say '/usr/lib/uucp/dialinfo' is used by HDB... If they're not using 'Dialers' to provide the per-modem chat scripts, then they're are NOT running standard HDB. Standard lookup sequence is Systems -> Devices -> Dialers & Dialcodes. If this isn't what they're doing, they've been hacking it for some reason. Yes, 'cu' IS different for HDB, since it needs to use the same lookup procedure as uucp/uucico to determine how to reach a particular system or address a particular modem to dial out. Bob Halloran Distributed Programming Tools Group ========================================================================= Bang-ist: {ATT-ACC, rutgers}!mtune!rkh DDD: (201)957-6034 At-ist: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM USPS: AT&T IS Labs, 200 Laurel Ave Rm 3G-314 Middletown NJ 07748 Disclaimer: If you believe I'm speaking for anyone but myself, you're sadly mistaken. Quote: "Good morning, the Russians still beating the pants off us in space?" -- Opus to Oliver, "Bloom County" =========================================================================
rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (964[jak]-Robert Halloran) (02/16/88)
In article <10@vsi.UUCP> sullivan@vsi.UUCP (Michael T Sullivan) writes: >In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: >> Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of >> cu, or if there's a difference? > >The difference is that the HDB version should know how to work with uugetty. >Don't know why they don't, though. All I can get out of them is "It's >public domain software and we don't support it." HDB is ANYTHING but public domain; it is an AT&T product, buying source from the AT&T Toolchest costs about $2000. last time I looked, binary redistribution rights cost an additional $20K, and it is the ONLY version of uucp provided under V.3. If you're running the '386 version, supposedly SVr3, Microport would have received standard HDB as part of their distribution tape. If you're running the '286 version, it would have cost them as above to make it available under that SVr2 port, since the only V.2 it is standard for is the version for the AT&T 3B series. More obfuscation, from the sound of it. Bob Halloran Distributed Programming Tools Group ========================================================================= Bang-ist: {ATT-ACC, rutgers}!mtune!rkh DDD: (201)957-6034 At-ist: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM USPS: AT&T IS Labs, 200 Laurel Ave Rm 3G-314 Middletown NJ 07748 Disclaimer: If you believe I'm speaking for anyone but myself, you're sadly mistaken. Quote: "Good morning, the Russians still beating the pants off us in space?" -- Opus to Oliver, "Bloom County" =========================================================================
terry@wsccs.UUCP (terry) (02/27/88)
In article <10@vsi.UUCP>, sullivan@vsi.UUCP (Michael T Sullivan) writes: > In article <10060@tycho.UUCP>, lyndon@tycho.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > > Does anyone know why Microport doesn't provide the 'HDB' version of > > cu, or if there's a difference? > > The difference is that the HDB version should know how to work with uugetty. > Don't know why they don't, though. All I can get out of them is "It's > public domain software and we don't support it." Microport doesn't need uugetty to do what HDB is needed for... callin/callout on the same physical port. See SIO(7) of your system manual for details. | Terry Lambert UUCP: ...!decvax!utah-cs!century!terry | | @ Century Software or : ...utah-cs!uplherc!sp7040!obie!wsccs!terry | | SLC, Utah | | These opinions are not my companies, but if you find them | | useful, send a $20.00 donation to Brisbane Australia... | | 'There are monkey boys in the facility. Do not be alarmed; you are secure' |