Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 11:06:31 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: peter@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Cc: ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com, freebsd-hackers@wcarchive.cdrom.com, longyear@netcom.com Subject: Re: chat(8) improvements for SL/IP dialout. Message-ID: <9502021806.AA13816@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199502021112.FAA11158@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Peter da Silva" at Feb 2, 95 05:12:29 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> 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.
Or you could do what everyone has done since time immemorial and open
with a sleep the device so that the chat closer is not the final closer.
Then the problem that the patch supposedly fixes will never occur.
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9502021806.AA13816>