Chuck Robey wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Warren Block wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It turns out that uplcom(4) adapters don't support the required
sp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Warren Block wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>> Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It turns out that uplcom(4) adapters don't support the required
> speed of
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It turns out that uplcom(4) adapters don't support the required
speed of 50 baud anymore.
You know, it might actually support it if you hack up the driver.
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It turns out that uplcom(4) adapters don't support the required
> > > speed of 50 baud anymore.
> >
> > You know, it might actually support it if you hack up the driver.
> > The source says the PL230
Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It turns out that uplcom(4) adapters don't support the required
> > speed of 50 baud anymore.
>
> You know, it might actually support it if you hack up the driver.
> The source says the PL2303X "can set any rate".
The data sheet disagrees.
"The fle
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> Today I thought I'd hook up a simple DCF77 radio clock receiver,
> serial port type, by way of a USB-to-serial converter. Just to see
> how this compares to the same gadget hooked up to an actual serial
> port (which are getting rare).
>
> ntpd[37
