On 10/3/2014 9:52 PM, Joel Rees wrote: > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Jerry Stuckle <jstuc...@attglobal.net> wrote: >> On 10/3/2014 8:19 PM, Joel Rees wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Jerry Stuckle <jstuc...@attglobal.net> >>> wrote: >>>> On 10/2/2014 8:24 PM, Ethan Rosenberg wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> In addition to Dan's comments - is your cable OK? Do you need a >>>> straight-through cable or a cross-over cable? Does the terminal >>>> require/honor DSR/TSR and RTS/CTS? If so, are these lines active? >>>> >>>> You may need a breakout box on the cable to see what's happening on the >>>> lines. >>> >>> If, for some reason, you can't get a breakout box, you may be able to >>> do basic tests on the cable with a multimeter (ohm-meter or >>> connectivity function), the pin diagrams, some patience, and maybe an >>> extra pair of hands (if you can't find small-mouth alligator clips or >>> pin clips). Just don't tell whoever handles requisitions/budget unless >>> they understand that patience costs time and money when doing things >>> like this. You have to be really careful to keep the leads from >>> slipping, and not noticing a slipped lead can cost hours of >>> unnecessary work.And there are tests you really don't want to try >>> without a breakout box or the equivalent. >>> >> >> Why couldn't he? They're cheap, i.e. >> http://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product_10001_10001_14285_-1. >> >> Note if he's using DB9 connectors he would need a pair of DB9-DB25 >> connectors. But they are also cheap. > > Uhm, maybe he has a multimeter now, and doesn't want to wait for > overnight shipping or take the time to run down to a supply house > downtown or even wait for said supply house to do a same-day delivery. > > Or maybe finances at the company are really, really tight right at the moment. > > Now, of course, if the supply house is next door, and his company is > okay with people bringing in tools paid for out-of-pocket, going and > getting it would be a good excuse to take a half-hour break anyway > (assuming no lines at the supply house). > > My point was simply that connectivity checks don't need a breakout box. > > Breakout boxes do make them more convenient, and quicker, and give > more reliable results. Not to mention enabling more in-depth testing, > especially if you have an oscilloscope with data capture. > > I'm not arguing with you on this one, Jerry, I was just offering an > alternative. Not a great alternative, but maybe a useful one. >
If his company cannot afford $9.95 + shipping for a breakout box, then that company is in deep crap anyway. And if he's a consultant and can't afford the basic tools to do his job, he shouldn't be in the business. And he's already worked on this much more than overnight (or even second-day) delivery would have caused a delay. An oscilloscope (with or without data capture) is much more expensive, and still can't monitor all of the lines concurrently - at least unless you have an 8 channel scope (*very expensive*). And a multimeter will work for one wire at a time - if you have access to the lines. But if he has molded plugs and no access to the interior connections of the terminal or the computer, neither a multimeter nor an oscilloscope will be any good. It's all about having the *right tools* to do the job. In this case the right tool is inexpensive and easily obtainable. P.S. As I've told you before - there is no need to copy me. I am subscribed to the mailing list. Jerry Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/542f55cd.8090...@attglobal.net
