ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (12/09/88)
There have been lots of reports about printers not working, giving printer
busy or out of paper and refusing to work. A few weeks ago, somebody (I forget
who, sorry) posted a message saying these were caused by using the wrong
printer port. I have now changed printer.c to make a dynamic test to discover
the printer port. The fix below to printer.c should end this problem forever.
If it doesn't, let me know.
Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
*** printer.old Thu Dec 8 21:18:44 1988
--- printer.c Thu Dec 8 21:56:54 1988
***************
*** 221,230 ****
{
/* Color display uses 0x378 for printer; mono display uses 0x3BC. */
! int i;
! extern int color;
!
! port_base = (color ? PR_COLOR_BASE : PR_MONO_BASE);
pr_busy = FALSE;
port_out(port_base + 2, INIT_PRINTER);
for (i = 0; i < DELAY_COUNT; i++) ; /* delay loop */
--- 221,233 ----
{
/* Color display uses 0x378 for printer; mono display uses 0x3BC. */
! int i = 0, testval = 0xAA;
! extern int color;
!
! /* See if PR_COLOR_BASE installed by writing to it and reading it back. */
! port_out(PR_COLOR_BASE, testval); /* output random bit pattern */
! port_in(PR_COLOR_BASE, &i); /* read it back */
! port_base = (i == testval ? PR_COLOR_BASE : PR_MONO_BASE);
pr_busy = FALSE;
port_out(port_base + 2, INIT_PRINTER);
for (i = 0; i < DELAY_COUNT; i++) ; /* delay loop */
***************
*** 233,239 ****
/*===========================================================================*
! * pr_char *
*===========================================================================*/
PUBLIC pr_char()
{
--- 236,242 ----
/*===========================================================================*
! * pr_char *
*===========================================================================*/
PUBLIC pr_char()
{dtynan@sultra.UUCP (Der Tynan) (12/13/88)
In article <1785@ast.cs.vu.nl>, ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: > There have been lots of reports about printers not working, giving printer > busy or out of paper and refusing to work. A few weeks ago, somebody (I forget > who, sorry) posted a message saying these were caused by using the wrong > printer port. I have now changed printer.c to make a dynamic test to discover > the printer port. The fix below to printer.c should end this problem forever. > If it doesn't, let me know. > > Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) I can't vouch for the person who said that it was caused by the wrong port, but that's not the problem I have. Basically, the printer skips characters. On the average, about five per page. It doesn't do this under Messy-DOS. Way back in the old days, when I was running version 1.2, I installed Barry McMullens' revised version which fixed the problem. However, since I went to 1.3c, I haven't changed his driver to work with the new locking yet. I have heard of other people with this problem. It seems the common-denominator is a slow printer. At any rate, it is not a function of the port number. BTW; could a V7-guru please let me know if the following is an un-problem. I noticed that if I set the protection of an executable to 511, then no-one but the owner can execute it. This is not the case with System V. Is this a bug or a feature? If it's a bug, I'll post the diffs to fix it as soon as I *do* actually fix it. - Der -- dtynan@zorba.Tynan.COM (Dermot Tynan @ Tynan Computers) {apple,mips,pyramid,uunet}!Tynan.COM!dtynan --- If the Law is for the People, then why do we need Lawyers? ---
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (12/15/88)
In article <2718@sultra.UUCP> dtynan@sultra.UUCP (Der Tynan) writes: >BTW; could a V7-guru please let me know if the following is an un-problem. I >noticed that if I set the protection of an executable to 511, then no-one but >the owner can execute it. This is not the case with System V. Is this a bug >or a feature? ... If it's a real executable, as opposed to a shell file or the equivalent, then a 511 file ought to be executable to everybody. -- SunOSish, adj: requiring | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 32-bit bug numbers. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
tif@cpe.UUCP (12/15/88)
Written 5:17 pm Dec 12, 1988 by sultra.UUCP!dtynan in cpe:comp.os.minix >I noticed that if I set the protection of an executable to 511, then no-one but >the owner can execute it. This is not the case with System V. Is this a bug >or a feature? The behavior you describe would be correct for shell scripts, incorrect for a real executable. Paul Chamberlain Computer Product Engineering, Tandy Corp. bellcore!motown!sys1!cpe!tif