RE: Sun alternate break

Title: RE: Sun alternate break

At first I thought the break was a stupid idea.  I've grown to love that break and wish that x86 machines supported it.  Linux 2.4 with serial 5.05 does

support the break but if the kernel is locked you can not use it.  So in a way, it is not a break at all.  The system continues to run after you issue the break.

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Rae [mailto:iainr@dcs.ed.ac.uk]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 10:46 AM
To: users@conserver.com
Subject: Re: Sun alternate break

> RE: Sun alternate breakWhat I meant was, does applying that patch require
> anything special to be done to conserver, or does the Solaris kernel for
> that client understand the break from conserver and interpret it correctly?
> I didn't want to patch conserver so that all machines it manages now have to
> make use of that alternate break.  Only one machine might be set up like
> that, so that machine should still be "breakable", just not from those
> inadvertent disconnects.
>
any suns which are patched should ignore any breaks sent via the conserver menu
( l1) but will halt if you type ~^b (quickly)at the terminal session. So you
can use it without changing conserver, you just have to remember ~^b.

> Ernie

--
Iain Rae                        Tel:01316505202
Computing Officer               JCMB:2148
Division of Informatics
The University of Edinburgh

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@conserver.com
https://www.conserver.com/mailman/listinfo/users