Date: Thu, 04 May 1995 01:04:47 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@estienne.CS.Berkeley.EDU> To: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net> Cc: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov (Sean Kelly), rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, daveh@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: slattach!!!!!!! Message-ID: <199505040804.BAA11403@estienne.cs.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 04 May 1995 00:46:04 MDT." <199505040646.AAA14455@trout.sri.MT.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Before I got a dedicated line to campus, I used expect to allow me to ring >> my house in a specific patern and then have it call up to campus and >> reconnect. > >Huh? How to you ring a house in a pattern? Easy. Ring the line once three times for a minute. If you do this, normal people get your answering machine, while you can still have your modme reconnect to a local service provider from any where in the world for free. > >> I was able to do this in ~14 lines of expect. Can I do >> the same sort of thing with chat? > >The purpose of chat is to dial the phone and login to an account, not >calculate your monthly phone bill. :-) Oh, expect does that and a whole lot more. I used it to do auto timeout of my phone line, wall when it was going down, and even had an interface for other users to kick the line up from home. It was a very slick little setup, and the hardest thing about getting it to work was fixing slattach. What I think would be cool for the CDROM install would be an expect script that determined the type of software your ISP was running, asked you the right questions, then connected you seamlessly for an ftp install. > >> This was under 1.1.5 when I fixed slattach so that it would work with >> an expect script. > >> Some how, slattach was broken when it was brought into 2.0. > >It may be broken for expect, but it works great with chat as I've had >*zero* problems with my connection once I got all of the little quirks >figured out. (None of which were chat/slattach related) > >Bruce's comments may explain some of the behavior with regards to >process groups and such. Is it possible that chat ignores SIGHUP and is >therefore not succeptible to being killed when slattach drops carrier? > > > >Nate > -- Justin T. Gibbs ============================================== TCS Instructional Group - Programmer/Analyst 1 Cory | Po | Danube | Volga | Parker | Torus ==============================================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505040804.BAA11403>