Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:3221 comp.unix.microport:1479
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ames!amdahl!uunet!ispi!jbayer
From: jbayer@ispi.UUCP (id for use with uunet/usenet)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: Buggy UUCP (was: Re: Bell Tech 386 SysVr3)
Summary: Not a bug, just different devices
Message-ID: <173@ispi.UUCP>
Date: 3 Sep 88 04:11:48 GMT
References: <25145@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <465@sp7040.UUCP> <11643@steinmetz.ge.com> <394@marob.MASA.COM>
Organization: Intelligent Software Products, Inc.
Lines: 22

In article <394@marob.MASA.COM>, daveh@marob.MASA.COM (Dave Hammond) writes:
> 
> I've also noticed a nasty little `feature' of both the TeleBit and
> older uucico programs. If the aforementioned foreign comm program
> has set a lock on tty1a, and uucico is started up on tty1A -- you
> will see a quick `+++' and then an `ATH0', and you find yourself
> staring at `NO CARRIER'. Hmmm.

	Xenix (and I suspect many other Unixs) is stupid.  It doesn't
know that tty1a and tty1A both refer to the same device.  If you look at
the spool directory you will see the names of the lock files include
the device name.  Because of the case dependancy uucico will not realize
that they both are refering to the same device.

	Although I don't have the sources,  I would suspect it to be a
fairly simply  patch to  make uucp ignore case when looking at lock
files.  Hey SCO, are you listening??

Jonathan Bayer
Intelligent Software Products, Inc.
19 Virginia Ave.
Rockville Centre, NY   11570