peter@kitty.UUCP (Peter DaSilva) (08/09/85)
> Also note that, unless UniSoft broke the tty driver rather badly (which I > consider to be largely outside the realm of possibility), the read "timeout" > isn't really a timeout; the clock doesn't start running until the first > character comes in. More interesting & useful. > > This broke several programs I was trying to maintain on a system that > > was converted from SIII to SV. I still haven't gotten Xmodem to work > > reliably again > > The programs were broken already. If you turn off ICANON you *must* also > set MIN and TIME to some other values - MIN of 1 and TIME of 0 will emulate > V7's CBREAK mode exactly - if you want reliable results. If you didn't do > so, go fix your code. Nope. The system wasn't really SIII. I have since found out that Microsoft did their first SIII port by adding the SIII commands & making a few cosmetic changes to a V7 port. So, it was a V7 to SV conversion, not SIII to SV. > > The 4.2 method of handling timouts is much better, since it ADDS a > > function, instead of CHANGING an existing one. > > What "4.2 method of handling timeouts"? If you mean using > "alarm"/"setitimer", that's in S3/S5 ("alarm", that is; only 4.2BSD has > "setitimer", alas); it's been there since before V6. If you mean the > timeout in "select", that's a timeout, not a silo drain clock like TIME in > S3/S5 (as was pointed out before). You're right. Someone hit me.