Re: i've tried that too

From: Galen Somerville (galen_at_surewest.net)
Date: 02/19/05 

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:51:33 -0800

I have some 50k 8 inch intel floppies if you need them.

Galen

"Jim Carlock" <anonymous@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:%23CCXDdhFFHA.3244@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> On my XP system, I'm seeing XP as creating two devices:
> 1) The modem device
> 2) The port
>
> I'm thinking you should only be handling the modem device,
> and not the port in this case.
>
> I'm thinking along the lines that the modem is the device that
> you should be searching for and using FIRST. If that fails to
> turn up anything, then perhaps you can go into searching the
> ports and sending commands out the ports to see if there is
> a modem that responds.
>
> Microsoft seems to want to separate the concept of the port
> and the modem when dealing with XP (and NT). I'm speaking
> from a hardware background rather than a programming
> background.
>
> Don't think of Opening and Closing the port. The port is
> ALWAYS open. *** Grier was trying to tell you that.
>
> Try to think of it as follows (?):
> "releasing the mechanism of transport"
>
> The way you'd release the mechanism of transport is to:
>
> hang up the modem
>
> ie, send "the modem" (ie, in the device manager), rather than the
> port, the hangup command... ATH1 or ATH0. You might need to
> send an escape sequence to it "+++ATH. Maybe there's a modem
> with an obtuse command sequence?
>
> I really don't have a clue though and I'm wondering if I'm thinking
> in the proper manner myself. Most of my experience deals with
> setting up modems and installing drivers and prior to the Internet
> it was all setting up and configuring the Hayes modem sequences
> for various modems, and being that we are on such a topic...
>
> My first modem was a 300 baud, was purchased from Sam's
> club in or about 1988 or 1989 put inside a NorthGate 286
> which ran MS-DOS 4.01, later upgraded to MS-DOS 5, then
> later upgraded to MS-DOS 6.2. After that I was hooked to an
> online community forever...
>
> I recently found an AOL for DOS beta version 720k floppy
> disk. Funny thing... I must've copied it to that because the
> 80286 system I owned only held a 5 1/4" HD FDD when I
> bought it.
>
> --
> Jim Carlock
> Post replies to newsgroup.
>
> "steve" <steve@nospam.com> wrote:
> i made an app that only opens and closes a port. when i run it
> with an exteral modem connected to a real port it works normally.
>
> when i run it connected to the internal modem (virtual?) port, it
> opens the port normally and hangs the program when i attempt
> to close the port. this occurs on multiple computers of various
> brands around the office, all with cheapie internal modems of
> some kind connected to their own ports, and all runniing win xp.
> the internal modem ports do not show up under ports in the
> device manager, but under modems, the internal modem is
> shown as connected to some com port.
>
> i use the program (modem) to connect with modems in the field. the
program
> runs normally with an external modem connected to a real port. i can open
> and close the port, process AT commands, send and receive data, etc. and
> yes, i do hangup at the end of a connection. but the problem can be
reduced
> to simpler terms: if i just load the program and then click exit the
> program hangs without any connection being established. loading the
program
> involves opening the com port and initializing the modem, and occurs
without
> any problem. the only difference between the external modem on a real com
> port version and the internal modem on its own software or virtual com
port,
> is that i do not try and close the port with the internal modem because
that
> seems to hang the program. but if i just leave the port as is(open), the
> program hangs anyway when i click exit.
>
> any ideas?
>
> "YYZ" <none@none.com> wrote:
> > "steve" <steve@nospam.com> wrote:
> > > yes, i am opening the port and the application runs as it is supposed
to
> > > using the internal modem. if i try and close the port in the program,
> the
> > > program hangs. so i do not close it anywhere. and that is, i think
the
> >
> > I don't have a solid answer for you, but have you tried making a very
> small
> > app that all it does is open then close the port? I would imagine that
> > little app would work fine. If it does, then there is something else
that
> > your code is doing that makes this difficult.
> >
> > Start small -- addin all your code little bits at a time until it
crashes.
> > It probably won't take as long as you think, because I bet you can
> identify
> > LIKELY culprits and add those back in one at a time.
> >
> > Matt
>
>