[2893] in linux-net channel archive
/dev/cua? Vs /dev/ttyS? (was: Re: co-existance of pppd and mgetty ?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tony Nugent)
Mon May 13 06:07:07 1996
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 07:57:09 +1000
From: Tony Nugent <tonyn@sctnugen.ppp.gu.edu.au>
To: linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-ppp@vger.rutgers.edu
Helmut Riegler <helmut@sparc1.fast.co.at> said:
> On Wed, 8 May 1996, Jon Lewis wrote:
> > On Sun, 5 May 1996, Allen Curtis wrote:
> > Make sure you're using ttyS1 also for dialout. Forget whatever you've
> > heard about cua being for dialout and ttyS for dialin. With that, it
> > should work...I do it all the time.
>
> I think splitting ttyS? and cua? for incoming and outgoing calls is a bad
> idea. I tried to setup my system with Hylafax, SLIP, UUCP seyon and also
> for incoming calls.
>
> It wasn't possible with this splitting. I think the point is that the
> UUCP style locking must work for every application. This implies that the
> lockfile must be the same. Then you won't get problems.
>
> I am not sure wether it is better to use ttyS? or cua? for all. I am
> using the cua? ports because I had problems to setup Hylafax with ttyS?.
> It seems there are small differences in the behavior.
>
> With cua? I have no problems with my applications.
Can someone kindly explain the difference between the /dev/cua? and
/dev/ttyS? devices?
Exactly how _should_ they be used?
(10 points for the correct answer :-)
Cheers .
Tony _--_|\
tony@sctnugen.ppp.gu.edu.au / *\ T.Nugent@sct.gu.edu.au
ae.nugent@student.qut.edu.au\_.--._/ tnugent@cit.gu.edu.au
Brisbane, Queensland v Australia
-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-
One of the great disadvantages of hurry
is that it takes such a long time.
