Subject: Re: Formal getty replacement yet?
To: Greg A. Woods <>
From: Mark P. Gooderum <>
List: current-users
Date: 12/19/1994 14:52:04
> [ On Sun, December 18, 1994 at 14:18:16 (-0800), J.T. Conklin wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: Formal getty replacement yet?
> >
> > I remember what great fun it was debugging bidirectional modem ports
> > under Xenix/286.  Uugetty sometimes decided that modem responses was
> > someone trying to log in, and would continue to chat until I
> > recognized the problem.
> IMHO, it's an order of magnitude easier to debug such problems in
> user-space than in kernel/device space!  Having "locks" in kernel space
> means it's usually very very difficult to discover the exact state of
> the system from user-space, and/or to forcefully change the state of the
> system (i.e. much harder than simply removing a lock file).  Fixing a
> modem configuration is also usually easier than fixing a device driver,
> at least for most folks.

True, but if it works, it's much more bullet-proof.  Automatic cleanup
of locks on process exit, etc.  It's also a fix in one place
as opposed to a 1/2 dozen.  Having done both, I can say I prefer 
bi-directional devices to lock file support.

> Also IMHO, such things a ignoring modem control, or flow control, on a
> port are hardware problems and should be fixed with appropriate hardware
> solutions (i.e. jumpers in the connector!).

But it's often easier to find out the software config than the
hardware config and it is often easier for a system admin to
have the hardware as standard as possible and adjust the system 
config (you could argue the other way I'll grant in advance)..
It's a matter of preference.

Also, the world will always be stuck supporting deficient hardware (modem 
doesn't drive the lines correctly, the terminal is on the other end of
an existing cable that isn't proper, etc).  Give the software 
fix to the user/admin, let them use which they prefer.

Admittedly though, my current solution is software, although it
doesn't involve any Getty changes.  I use flexfax with great 
success.  It only spawns Getty when it needs to, maintains the UUCP lock 
files itself, and gives a nice status as well.  As long as
your outgoing programs use/honor UUCP lock files (both tip and the latest 
Kermit do), works great.  One part I like about flex-fax is it 
gives me a single software point of control for the modem/line.  I can
set the number of rings to answer on, whether the port supports login, etc,
in one place.  No need to worry about setting the S0 reg (and saving
it), etc. 
Mark Gooderum