On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 04:16:24AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well, at a guess, you can wait for me to do a courtesy-call capable > kernel, which may be a while, and a good while more for it to be > accepted, or you can do it yourself, or you can solve the problem in a > totally unexpected way. Or you could just give over and fork(), but > somehow I don't expect you will. I might just surprise you and use fork :) The fork method isn't elegant either but it beats polling IMHO. If I get it working (which will be after I sort out the rest of my software), I'll post an example to linux-serial. --C - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- modem control line checking - is polling the only way? Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the onl... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the... Michael Harig
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is pol... Michael Harig
- Re: modem control line checking - i... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is pol... Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: modem control line checking - i... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling... Tom Glass
- Re: modem control line checking - is pol... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the onl... Vern Hoxie
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the... Craig Schlenter
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the onl... Vern Hoxie
- Re: modem control line checking - is polling the... Theodore Y. Ts'o
