Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't have
the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to compile
Minicom from the source.

For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site running
Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.

--
Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA
mailto:billb@ftldesign.com
History of Technology Websites:
http://ftldesign.com

Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't have
| the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to compile
| Minicom from the source.
|
| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site running
| Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.

Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which insisted
on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also wanted to su to
root?


--
JP

Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:

> Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
>| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't
>| have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to
>| compile Minicom from the source.
>|
>| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
>| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
>
> Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which
> insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also
> wanted to su to root?

That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been fixed on
RedHat Linux at least.

--
Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA
mailto:billb@ftldesign.com
History of Technology Websites:
http://ftldesign.com

Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
|
| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't
| >| have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to
| >| compile Minicom from the source.
| >|
| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
| >
| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which
| > insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also
| > wanted to su to root?
|
| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been fixed on
| RedHat Linux at least.

Communications programs should be su uucp.

--
JP

Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:

> Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
>| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>|
>| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
>| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't
>| >| have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to
>| >| compile Minicom from the source.
>| >|
>| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
>| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
>| >
>| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which
>| > insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also
>| > wanted to su to root?
>|
>| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been fixed on
>| RedHat Linux at least.
>
> Communications programs should be su uucp.
>
I checked on RedHat 9 and it's set to uucp.

But does anyone have the Minicom binary for OS 5.0.5?

--
Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA
mailto:billb@ftldesign.com
History of Technology Websites:
http://ftldesign.com

Bill Burns <billb@ftldesign.com> wrote:
>Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:

>> Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
>>| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>>|
>>| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
>>| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't
>>| >| have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to
>>| >| compile Minicom from the source.
>>| >|
>>| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
>>| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
>>| >
>>| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which
>>| > insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also
>>| > wanted to su to root?
>>|
>>| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been fixed on
>>| RedHat Linux at least.
>>
>> Communications programs should be su uucp.
>>
>I checked on RedHat 9 and it's set to uucp.

>But does anyone have the Minicom binary for OS 5.0.5?

Maybe somebody has ported it, but I tend to doubt it. The only
reason I use it on Linux is that it's about all you'll generally
find, but IMHO it's pretty awful stuff. Just give me a raw cu
and get out of my way :-)

The other problem is that there is less and less need for it. I
only have a very few clients left where I can't get to them over
the internet and I'll drop 'em at any additional provocation..

If this is for users who are just expecting to see that interface
and are used to typing certain keystrokes, it might not be
all that difficult to put up a faux Minicom with a limited set of
features that you'd write in Perl or whatever and just call cu
appropriately..


--
tony@aplawrence.com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html

Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0000):
| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
|
| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
| >| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
| >|
| >| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
| >| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I don't
| >| >| have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would attempt to
| >| >| compile Minicom from the source.
| >| >|
| >| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
| >| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
| >| >
| >| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program, which
| >| > insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and which also
| >| > wanted to su to root?
| >|
| >| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been fixed on
| >| RedHat Linux at least.
| >
| > Communications programs should be su uucp.
| >
| I checked on RedHat 9 and it's set to uucp.
|
| But does anyone have the Minicom binary for OS 5.0.5?

You could run an old Xenix binary.

But why wouldn't you use xc instead?

--
JP

Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:

> Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 06:41:48PM +0000):
>| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>|
>| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
>| >| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>| >|
>| >| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
>| >| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I
>| >| >| don't have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would
>| >| >| attempt to compile Minicom from the source.
>| >| >|
>| >| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
>| >| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
>| >| >
>| >| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program,
>| >| > which insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and
>| >| > which also wanted to su to root?
>| >|
>| >| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been
>| >| fixed on RedHat Linux at least.
>| >
>| > Communications programs should be su uucp.
>| >
>| I checked on RedHat 9 and it's set to uucp.
>|
>| But does anyone have the Minicom binary for OS 5.0.5?
>
> You could run an old Xenix binary.
>
> But why wouldn't you use xc instead?
>
I downloaded the xc files from your site, but I see they're source
only. As I noted above, I don't have a compiler for 5.0.5. I'd be
happy to try it if you have a binary available.

--
Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA
mailto:billb@ftldesign.com
History of Technology Websites:
http://ftldesign.com

Tony Lawrence wrote:

> Bill Burns <billb@ftldesign.com> wrote:
>>Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>
>>> Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 04:17:18AM +0000):
>>>| Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
>>>|
>>>| > Bill Burns typed (on Wed, Dec 24, 2003 at 02:48:03AM +0000):
>>>| >| Does anyone have a Minicom binary for OpenServer 5.0.5? I
>>>| >| don't have the 5.0.5 development system otherwise I would
>>>| >| attempt to compile Minicom from the source.
>>>| >|
>>>| >| For user compatibility with Linux systems at the same site
>>>| >| running Minicom, I need to install it on one SCO system.
>>>| >
>>>| > Are you referring to some atrocious communications program,
>>>| > which insisted on disabling a port before dialing out, and
>>>| > which also wanted to su to root?
>>>|
>>>| That sounds like it, but I believe the su problem has been
>>>| fixed on RedHat Linux at least.
>>>
>>> Communications programs should be su uucp.
>>>
>>I checked on RedHat 9 and it's set to uucp.
>
>>But does anyone have the Minicom binary for OS 5.0.5?
>
> Maybe somebody has ported it, but I tend to doubt it. The only
> reason I use it on Linux is that it's about all you'll generally
> find, but IMHO it's pretty awful stuff. Just give me a raw cu
> and get out of my way :-)
>
> The other problem is that there is less and less need for it. I
> only have a very few clients left where I can't get to them over
> the internet and I'll drop 'em at any additional provocation..
>
> If this is for users who are just expecting to see that interface
> and are used to typing certain keystrokes, it might not be
> all that difficult to put up a faux Minicom with a limited set of
> features that you'd write in Perl or whatever and just call cu
> appropriately..
>
It's for clients in one of the last dialup hold-out industries -
Medicare and Medicaid claim billing. None of the insurance carriers
that handle the claims have any batch upload modes other than dialup.

When these systems were installed years ago we used Mlink, which has a
proprietary scripting language that you need the developer's kit for,
long since lost. Now the carriers have switched to a new claim format,
the old Mlink upload scripts no longer work, and I can't change them.

Newer users are on Redhat Linux and I set them up with Minicom. I was
hoping to make all the systems work the same to simplify support.

Perhaps I'll just switch them all to Kermit. I haven't used it before,
but at least it's available for most platforms and has plain-text
scripting.

--
Bill Burns, Long Island, NY, USA
mailto:billb@ftldesign.com
History of Technology Websites:
http://ftldesign.com

Bill Burns <billb@ftldesign.com> wrote:

>When these systems were installed years ago we used Mlink, which has a
>proprietary scripting language that you need the developer's kit for,
>long since lost. Now the carriers have switched to a new claim format,
>the old Mlink upload scripts no longer work, and I can't change them.

>Newer users are on Redhat Linux and I set them up with Minicom. I was
>hoping to make all the systems work the same to simplify support.

>Perhaps I'll just switch them all to Kermit. I haven't used it before,
>but at least it's available for most platforms and has plain-text
>scripting.

There you go. Hard to be better than that.

They even have a Msoft gui version. I reviewed an earlier version
at http://aplawrence.com/Reviews/kermit.html , and I'm sure
that it has just gotten better.

--
tony@aplawrence.com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html