Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!pacbell!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!tuvie!tugiig!plipp
From: plipp@tugiig (Lipp Peter)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: AN HISTORIC MOMENT!
Message-ID: <23@tugiig>
Date: 21 Jul 88 06:56:28 GMT
References: <841@ast.cs.vu.nl> <4200004@hpihoah.HP.COM>
Organization: none
Lines: 15

In article <4200004@hpihoah.HP.COM>, bruce@hpihoah.HP.COM (Bruce LaVigne) writes:
> divisors.  What this means is that since you can really only use integer
> numbers into the chip as a divisor, you don't get 19200 but something kindof
> close.  If the other side can handle it, fine, but IBM doesn't support it.

Just what I meant. The 'kindof close' depends on the input-clock to the
8250. As all PC-compatibles will use it, no problem will occur because
the 'kindof close' will be the same everywhere. If some fancy machine
which claims to be compatible uses a different clock rate, it might not be able
to communicate with others, and, more important, many programs won`t work
as soon as they program the chip directly (setting the divisor with the same
value won`t achieve the same results). In practice, I want to bet the only
problem is to handle the high data rate without protocol or delays.

Peter Lipp (plipp@tugiig.uucp)