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