With all due respect, and in spite of my initial decision not to get
involved with this little flamewar...
When I was scouting around prior to buying our PM2E-30, I specifically
stated that the serial ports had to be available as two-way local devices
from our SCO UNIX boxes. PortMaster arrives, "*surprise*, you need in_pmd
in order to use the ports as local devices! And guess what? We don't EVER
plan to support SCO! Ha ha, too bad, so sad!"
Okay, I embellished that just a bit.
However, the callousness of your "I feel *no* sympathy" bit above combined
with the fact that I was effectively _lied to_ prior to making the purchase
chaps my hide just a bit.
I'm otherwise very satisfied with the product, I can get to the port
through TERM for UNIX (via the telnet device -- however, we can't use our
scripts properly, and can't manipulate the port settings that way), and it
meets all of our dial IN needs.
I've offered to port in_pmd to SCO UNIX _for_ you (thereby eliminating any
resource considerations on your part), and am willing to sign an NDA in
order for the privilege. This, IMHO, is the ONLY disadvantage to having a
PM as opposed to a DigiBoard PortServer, which we previously had. It had
local device emulation which worked flawlessly, available on SCO UNIX.
So my final question, and I'd like it answered publicly, is...given the
above information, WHY are you reluctant to take me up on an offer which
can only lead to increased customer satisfaction for you?
(As an aside, I personally don't give a rip if you support pm_console, etc,
from SCO UNIX. It's only the local device emulation ala in_pmd I'm
interested in).
Thank you for your consideration on this...
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Allen J. Newton BASIS International Ltd, (505)-345-5232 5901 Jefferson NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109 anewton@basis.com Network Administrator <*>