vgetty play problem.

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 28, 1999 at 05:51:07PM +0100, Rob Clark wrote:
> With further investigation I have found that a hardflow_cmnd command, just
> 'AT' in this case, is returning VCON and not OK. Allowing this as an
> acceptable responce seems to fix the problem. Is this too much of a hack
> to include as a patch. Is there a case where you wouldn't want this to be
> the responce?

Now this is one of the cases where the easiest solution would be to
consider this modem to be FUBAR... - not worth the effort.  A modem that
isn't able to answer a single AT command is just hilarious.

I don't think it would really hurt vgetty, but I'm afraid that if we
permit this in general, we might run into abiguous situations some later
day ("is it this-or-that response").  For this specific command,
permitting VCON and adding a large explanation to the source might be
ok... but Marc has to decide upon that.

> The problematic modem is a US Robotics 56K voice faxmodem model number
> 5663, UK edition, which I think they have just stopped making.

I'm not surprised.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert.doering@physik.tu-muenchen.de