Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!pacbell!ames!amdcad!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!unido!fauern!faui44!immd3.informatik.uni-erlangen.de!rtregn From: rtregn@immd3.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Robert Regn) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: (IBM V1.3) tty1 performance? Message-ID: <757@faui10.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Date: 2 Dec 88 14:33:13 GMT References: <5687@louie.udel.EDU> Organization: IMMD I, University of Erlangen, W-Erlangen Lines: 25 In article <5687@louie.udel.EDU>, 75008378%VAX2.NIHED.IE@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: > I've just got V1.3 (MINIX-PC) running. The best performance I can get > from the the serial port (under Kermit, without losing *chunks* of > stuff in emulation) seems to be 300 bps (kermit won't believe 600 > exists, and performance is lousy at 1200). This is on a 10MHz XT-clone. > > I am aware of some patches from Charles Hendrick (~3-OCT-88) which I have > yet to apply, and which may well imporove this situation. But my question > is: what performance should I expect? .. I'am running kermit on an IBM AT (6 MHz) with 4800 Baud and on a Tandon AT (10 MHz) with 9600 Baud. The last patches after 1.3c, which increases the buffer sizes in tty.c or rs232.c brought no higher possible speed on both machines. I believe, they are only needed if you want increase the packet size in kermit > 9600 - is this going to be out of the question? I'am afraid (for an XT). I would like to test kermit with 19200 baud. Is this supported by the kernel? Has someone experience? The kermit from Charles Hendrick don't support this speed - Has someone successfully changed term.c to 19200 ? Robert Regn rtregn@faui32.uucp