[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference csc32::consolemanager

Title:POLYCENTER Console Manager
Notice:Kits, Scans, Docs on CSC32:: as PCM$KITS:,PCM$DOCS:, PCM$SCANS:
Moderator:CSC32::BUTTERWORTH
Created:Thu Aug 06 1992
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1541
Total number of notes:6564

976.0. "Not able to send BREAK wit AXPPCM1.5 !" by 49312::VNABRW::KARTNER_M (This is the road to hell) Wed Sep 13 1995 12:42

    Hi!
    We have got a problem with AXPPCM V1.5 concerning transmitting a BREAK to
    the VAXes.
    
    Serverportsetup is OK.
    
    $console connect node1 /break=ctrl_a
    
    entering ctrl_a brings up the message
    
    	do you want to send a break signal ?
    
    Nothing happens!
    
    It doesn't depend on the chosen break combination!
    There is no difference if I answer the question with Y or N!
    
    The system I ran the test with is a VAX7700 with break enabled.
    
    If there is no way to transmit a break the product is unusable
    for the customer.
    
    HAs anyone got an idea how to solve the problem?
    
    							thanks
    							Michael
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
976.1CSC32::BUTTERWORTHGun Control is a steady hand.Wed Sep 13 1995 12:486
    In the first place, a VAX 7700 doesn;t use break as a halt sequence, it
    uses ctrl-p!! Enter a ctrl-p , *MAKE SURE* that ctrl-p is *NOT* mapped
    as the *break* key as you really need to send ctrl-p.
    
    Regs,
      Dan
976.2Thanks49312::VNABRW::KARTNER_MThis is the road to hellThu Sep 14 1995 06:348
    Hi!
    Thanks. I don't know what was wrong with yesterdays test but it
    worked today.
    
    But I don't think its a good idea to define BREAK as CTRL_P 
    by DEFAULT
    								thanks
    								Michael
976.3CSC32::BUTTERWORTHGun Control is a steady hand.Thu Sep 14 1995 12:5016
    >   But I don't think its a good idea to define BREAK as CTRL_P
    >    by DEFAULT
    
    Michael,
      I simply cannot agree with you strongly enough. The plan is/was to
    use entirely different nomenclature. The proposal is to define the
    "HALT key" instead of a "BREAK key" and to make it so that what the
    key actually sends is user defineable. This would allow us to use say
    ctrl-p as the halt key for *all* systems. On those systemsa that we
    need to send ctrl-p to we'll set it up so it sends ctrl-p. For those
    systems that need a break we'll set it up so it sends break. When you
    type the key you would be prompted:  "Do you really want to HALT the
    system?".
    
    Regs,
      Dan