Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 05:12:29 -0600 From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com> To: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@wcarchive.cdrom.com, longyear@netcom.com, rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com Subject: Re: chat(8) improvements for SL/IP dialout. Message-ID: <199502021112.FAA11158@bonkers.taronga.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 01 Feb 95 21:03:39 EST." <199502020203.VAA01811@ponds.UUCP>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Looks nifty. One point:
> t.c_lflag = 0;
> + if(command) {
> + /* If we're going to execute a command, don't hang-up */
> + /* the device when we're done. */
> + t.c_cflag &= ~HUPCL;
> + }
> t.c_cc[VERASE] = t.c_cc[VKILL] = 0;
Why not? Oh, for SLIP or PPP where the command just establishes a connection
that's useful, but for a situation where you're running some conventional
command (like, say, a dialback security mechanism) you want to retain HUPCL.
I'd say make this a separate option, or even better have an optional set of
stty arguments to apply to the port (including baud rate, which you can pre-
parse to set up before calling stty and the command).
(pppd is already set up to call chat itself. I'm sorta surprised slip doesn't
do that...)
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199502021112.FAA11158>