On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> "Swapping them internally" would probably involve about 30 seconds of
> work. It's not hard, really. 8)
Yes I know I could have done that. Then reconfigured my getty's, my
minicom etc. It's the principle of the thing - I prefer to bend the
software to my will rather than have to open the case.
> Yes. The solution is "do not connect a modem with echo enabled to the
> console". The loader will spend endless hours talking to the modem (and
> if _it_ didn't, getty would a few seconds later).
The getty is not a problem - it's configured correctly for my modem on
com1.
> No. Wrong solution. Connect your console to the console port and your
> modem to the modem port.
Hmm, last time I checked, they were just 'serial ports'.
> Sorry about the fascist attitude, but you really do just need to Do The
> Right Thing here.
:-)
I think the Right Thing is either way. Otherwise there wouldn't be
documentation on how to change it to some other com port would there?
A hardware swap would hardly by The Right Thing if the box was a few
thousand kilometres away would it? I would expect a Microsoft product to
force me to change my hardware to fit what the software wants - not
FreeBSD.
At any rate, the point is moot, it now works. I never had any real issue
with the "problem" - I knew I would be able to resolve it in some way. I
merely wanted to know if it was feasible to change the software to cope
with this situation, and if not then a little note (which I have supplied)
to add to the documentation for those less cluefull than me (Dog knows
there must be one or two out there) is a nice touch, and equally
useful.
FreeBSD documentation is already very impressive, if I can help one other
person avoid the (admittedly minor) problem I had, I'm happy.
- Justin
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
