Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!ucqais!blubaugh
From: blubaugh@ucqais.uc.edu (Dr. Blubaugh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Multi serial/parallel ports
Message-ID: <2524@ucqais.uc.edu>
Date: 24 Oct 90 16:33:09 GMT
References: <52902.656747372@atronx.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. Dept. of Chemistry
Lines: 69

In <52902.656747372@atronx.UUCP> rwm@atronx.UUCP (Russell McOrmond) writes:

>In a message posted on 22 Oct 90 18:24:49 GMT,
>blubaugh@ucqais.uc.edu (Dr. Blubaugh) wrote:
>DB>    I'd like the ability to drop in a serial card and have the system
>DB>automagically know what it is and how to talk to it.  This means that

> ASDG tried with their ReDirector - If you opened 'Serial.Device', it

    This is a third party solution to the problem but it is not the
Commodore approved solution.  For obvious reasons I'm sure ASDG's
ReDirector doesn't work with Checkpoint Technologies' multiserial card. 
We need a solution from Commodore that is available to all hardware
developers. 

>So, someone COULD write a shell that would allow you to set up a Preferences
>to map Serial.device 'units' to device/unit combinations for the specific
>software.

    But this can't be done with any combination of serial cards available.

>  For this list to come up on AutoConfig, Commodore Themselves would obviously
>have to set this up.  The hardware Locations are already part of AutoConfig, 

    My point exactly.  Commodore needs to develop a method for third
party vendors to make their hardware become part of the system.  Adding
extra serial ports means more units appear in the serial.device. 
Adding more parallel ports means more units appear in the
parallel.device.  Also some of these ports might have printers attached
so C= might as well expand the printer.device to allow someone to have
a laserprinter on par1: (as prt1:) and a Paintjet on ser4: (as prt2:)

>Here's the problem, though.  It's not DOS that needs to know about these
>things, but the application.  Right now a lot of software just has 

    But DOS does need to know.  I want to redirect output from a CLI to the
third serial port.  You can't directly send IO to a device/unit from the
CLI.  

>DB>                            I just think its ridiculous that IBM people
>DB>can add multi-port cards and most all of their software can find the

>This is because they have a hardware standard, not a software one - They are
>in a much worse position than we are at this point.  They also STILL have to
>have software SPECIFICALLY WRITTEN to allow multiple serial boards to work with
>it - You can't just 'NewZap' the binary like a lot of us do now with Amiga
>software (IE: NewZap references to 'serial.device' to 'supra.device' to use
>the Supra CardModem)

    I know that the IBM had specific addresses for extra ports, but my
point is that MS-DOS does understand about LPT2: and COM3: when these
multiport cards are added.  I don't agree that we are in any better
shape.  You mention the problem yourself.  We have to NEWZAP programs to
use devices other than serial.device and other programs have added the
ability to talk out through any device when actually it would make more
sense to use other units of the serial.device.
    
    I had assumed that the AmigaMail article by Bryce Nesbit (published
over a year ago) was telling us about a method that Commodore was
currently developing for 2.0.  Alas, it seems that this was preliminary
design specs that didn't make it into 2.0.  I take it that NEWZAPing
binaries and writing code to handle user settable device name and unit
is the APPROVED method until further notice. 

-- 
Dwight Blubaugh Ph.D.
UUCP: {decuac,mit-eddie,phri,pyramid}!uccba!ucqais!blubaugh.UUCP
INTERNET: blubaugh@ucqais.uc.edu
Anybody want to hire a Ph.D. chemist with a computer background?????