Serial devices with Win2003/SFU

	Free Downloads, Community Forum, FAQs and Developer Resources

Make /Tools Your Home | Link to us

Today's posts | Posts since last visit | Most Active Topics

All Forums	Register	Login	Search	Subscriptions	My Profile	Inbox
Tool Warehouse	FAQs	Resources	Help	Member List	Address Book	Logout

Serial devices with Win2003/SFU

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Windows - UNIX Interop] >> System & Network Admin Forum >> Serial devices with Win2003/SFU

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Oct. 22, '05, 2:39:29 AM

heinz

Posts: 63
Joined: Oct. 21, '04,
Status: offline

Sofar we've been unsuccesful to utilize digi portserver II's to drive printers and terminals.

This makes migration a little harder (from Linix) as more hardware has to be replaced.

Anyone know of anything that can provide serial ports with SFU? Even if I have to propose a new card and/or port server it would make migrations more attractive when legacy printers and ascii terminals can stay in use.

TIA - Heinz

Post #: 1

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Oct. 22, '05, 10:47:01 AM

Rodney
Administrator

Posts: 3696
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline

Have you been using the latest hotfix ?
There have been updates over the summer to the serial port code.

Have you used the "regular" ports that come on the motherboard instead to see if
they are working okay for you?

(in reply to heinz)

Post #: 2

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Nov. 9, '05, 10:07:12 AM

heinz

Posts: 63
Joined: Oct. 21, '04,
Status: offline

I've been rather chicken to apply the hot-fixes as everything else is running ok and I had my little bout with Service Pak 2 that was rather scary.

Does MS apply the hot-fixes to current downloads of SFU or is SFU download same as 12 month ago?

I'm about to get a new machine inhouse and that will give me a chance to experiment some.

If I remember correctly, onboard COM ports worked ok but I'll have to confirm that again once new machine is here.

(in reply to Rodney)

Post #: 3

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Nov. 9, '05, 12:27:27 PM

Rodney
Administrator

Posts: 3696
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline

Quite a few people are running the hotfix without problems. The hotfixes
are rolled cumulative so the most current one has all of the fixes in earlier
hotfixes. The download for Interix 3.5 was updated once (about 14 or 16 months ago)
with the hotfix for Win2000. There have been several hotfixes since then, but no update.

(in reply to heinz)

Post #: 4

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Nov. 10, '05, 9:37:18 AM

heinz

Posts: 63
Joined: Oct. 21, '04,
Status: offline

Thanks Rodney. Would you also recommend SP for Win2003 after/before applying hotfixes?

On a fresh install what would be the recommended sequence? This close?
Win2003
Win2003 SPack
SFU - Basic install
Hotfixes
Applications

Since I have a couple of fresh installations coming up in the next couple of months I have some leeway, i.e. if no good, re-install. Once a system goes online it's always harder.

(in reply to Rodney)

Post #: 5

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Nov. 10, '05, 12:58:39 PM

Rodney
Administrator

Posts: 3696
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline

For using the serial ports I would recommend getting the latest Interix hotfix.
There were over the spring/summer some changes in this area. So having the most
current can only help get things on the "best foot" possible.

Your sequence seems correct.
Remember to have setuid and case sensitive filesystems turned on.
Recall that W2K3's R2 is coming. It RTM's December; general release January.

(in reply to heinz)

Post #: 6

RE: Serial devices with Win2003/SFU - Nov. 11, '05, 10:51:59 AM

heinz

Posts: 63
Joined: Oct. 21, '04,
Status: offline

Wouldn't you know it... early Jan is what I had planned for a customer install :-)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll see how a fresh install goes and then decide whether to delay.

(in reply to Rodney)