Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!voder!pyramid!ctnews!mitisft!dold
From: dold@mitisft.Convergent.COM (Clarence Dold)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: What's wrong with ct? (candidate for FAQ?)
Message-ID: <1496@mitisft.Convergent.COM>
Date: 8 Jun 90 01:00:14 GMT
References: <1990Jun6.202530.8038@aqdata.uucp>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Convergent Technologies, San Jose, CA
Lines: 23

in article <1990Jun6.202530.8038@aqdata.uucp>, sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) says:

> I try to ct a number and I get back:
> 	No 2400 dialers on this system

> even though uucp, cu and the rest of the gang can find 2400 lines just fine.

This might not the case, since your description makes it sound like you are
forcing a dial-out, but...
If you call in on the only 2400 line that you have, and try to invoke a 'ct'
expecting it to call you back, it won't work.  altcon() (I think) looks for 
a free 2400 device, finds yours, finds a lock file, and hangs.
try 'ct -x9 phone_no' to see what's happening.
If this is the problem, create another Devices entry at 2400 baud, tied to 
a /dev/ttyNNN that has no real device.  In my case, I used a higher dev
number than I have ports on my system.  ct allocates the other dialer,
hangs up your connection, fails on the other port, looks for another,
and finds yours free, dials you back...
-- 
---
Clarence A Dold - dold@tsmiti.Convergent.COM            (408) 435-5293
               ...pyramid!ctnews!tsmiti!dold        FAX (408) 435-3105
               P.O.Box 6685, San Jose, CA 95150-6685         MS#10-007