Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Question about multiple serial boards Message-ID: <4943@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 16 Jan 90 13:18:55 GMT References: <7970@nigel.udel.EDU> <14137@grebyn.com> <130261@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Distribution: na Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 17 > Commodore for not following through on addressing this > problem. (multiple serial ports) The port handler isn't even in ROM > for heaven sake so something certainly could have been done. What should they have done? The serial port is in a documented name space. It's up to applications developers to provide a way of specifying the port number and device name to their program. Hardcoding ("serial.device",0) is as bad as a UNIX program hardcoding ("/dev/acu") or ("UNIX:0"). I've seen people go around and around on this, and I'm still missing the point. Devices have names. Are the names aesthetically displeasing or something? Whatever *new* scheme Commodore came up with would have no better chance of being supported by developers than the *old* scheme. -- Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva `-_-' 'U` "I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape somewhere"