Xref: utzoo comp.unix.internals:2539 comp.unix.programmer:1571 comp.unix.wizards:24868 comp.unix.questions:30367 Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.programmer,comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!ox.com!math.fu-berlin.de!fub!geminix.in-berlin.de!gemini From: gemini@geminix.in-berlin.de (Uwe Doering) Subject: Re: Hardware flow control for TTY ports under V.3 References: <451@frcs.UUCP> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1991 15:12:55 GMT Distribution: comp Organization: Private UNIX Site Message-ID: Lines: 23 paul@frcs.UUCP (Paul Nash) writes: >I think that I have a problem. I need to talk from a TTY port on >a 386 Unix box (Intel V.3.2) to a device that does hardware flow >control. The output port (currently) uses the FAS drivers, but >this software needs to be portable to machines that don't have >such luxuries. There is no portable way to do hardware handshake under UNIX. The termio(7) man page author didn't think of it (this is the only explanation I have for that omission). And therefore, every vendor chose his own way of doing hardware flow control. Many implementations do hardware flow control transparently (as does FAS), so that a program doesn't know (and doesn't _have_ to know) that it actually uses a port with hardware handshake. On the other hand, SCO decided to do it non- transparently, that is, the program has to know about certain termio(7) flags and has to set them to enable hardware flow control. Uwe -- Uwe Doering | INET : gemini@geminix.in-berlin.de Berlin |---------------------------------------------------------------- Germany | UUCP : ...!unido!fub!geminix.in-berlin.de!gemini