On Fri, 08.02.2008 at 13:12:43 -0700, Scott Long wrote: > Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > > Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: > >> So, is boot0sio supposed to just work with a cheap USB->RS232 dongle at > >> the other end? I don't know how this paragraph from boot0cfg(8) is > >> affecting me. > >> > > boot0sio is wholly dependent upon BIOS support for addressing the on-board > > COM1 port. It is not intended (read: very unlikely) to work with USB > > dongles. > > > > If your BIOS does not support the call that it uses, then the symptoms will > > be similar to what you've seen. Unfortunately there is just not enough > > space in the MBR to implement any workarounds for this. > > > > Yeah, unless the BIOS provides traditional SIO emulation via USB (similar > idea to providing tradition AT keyboard emulation via USB) > then boot0sio won't work. It's not very feasible to put a USB > stack into the early boot loader anyways. It's somewhat possible > (at least, using a chained boot loader), but not very feasible. Erm, you guys got that one wrong. boot0sio is running on a machine without USB! It is the *other end* of the line (my laptop) where I'm using tip(1) on /dev/cuaU0. And I'm not sure if this provides the necessary signals to boot0sio to start working. So, to recap the question: Is boot0sio working with 9600 or 115200 baud for anyone on 8-CURRENT (and built with gcc 4.x)? Cheers, Ulrich Spoerlein -- It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak, and remove all doubt.Received on Sat Feb 09 2008 - 09:28:52 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:27 UTC