Problem with virtual serial port

[Paolino]

I have this problem:

i have bluetooh dongle connected via USB to my pc and my OS is Windows
XP PRO.
The bluetooth dongle provides two virtual serial ports that must be
used to comunicate in MASTER mode and in SLAVE mode.
I have a java application that when starts search all the serial ports
that are present on the system and tries to send strings to each one of
these.
The problem is that my application stopped without raising any
exception when it sends something to the virtual serial port to use to
communicate in SLAVE mode.
So, i need to know if exist a way to distinguish this type of port from
the other "normal" serial port and from the virtual serial port to use
to communicate in MASTER mode.
Thanks
Paolo

 

[jan V]

So, i need to know if exist a way to distinguish this type of port from

the other "normal" serial port and from the virtual serial port to use
to communicate in MASTER mode.

How do you access those "serial ports"? The answer to your question will
depend heavily on the answer to my question....

 

[Andrew Thompson]

I have this problem:

What a coincidence! Someone posting over on c.l.j.help
seems to have the exact same problem! Why don't you tune
into that thread for answers?
<http://groups.google.com.au/group/c...e2a74bb4909/ffe1dcf8763d4842#ffe1dcf8763d4842>

And please read these links..
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#xpost>
<http://www.physci.org/codes/javafaq.jsp#usenet>

 

[Paolino]

I am sorry Andrew,
but my problem it's very important for me and i absolutlely need to
resolve it.
In this case, al little cross.posting is necessary.
Sorry again
Paolo

 

[Paolino]

I use serial ports using javax.comm package.
I open a port, i get an outputStrem over it and i write on the
outputStream.
Thanks

Paolo

 

[Andrew Thompson]

I am sorry Andrew,

Apologies are worth nothing to me.

but my problem it's very important for me

You? Let us just stress, this is *your* problem.
*You* have come to these groups for help.

..and i absolutlely need to resolve it.

You care about that, but we don't have to, and beyond
a casual interest in the tchnical problem, I think that
you will generally find that people do *not* care.

To get an answer from people like that, you need
to entice them into it. Multi-posting across a
series of groups is not the way to do that.

In this case, al little cross.posting

You did not read the links that I gave, did you?

One of the courtesies of Usenet is listenning carefully
to the answers you get. And you apparently have not
even been polite enough to do that!

..is necessary.

No it is not! Not to any other member of this community.

Further, it is decreasing your chance of getting an answer.
<http://groups.google.com.au/group/c..._frm/thread/23662e2a74bb4909/ffe1dcf8763d4842>

 

[Paolino]

Ok, Andrew

i understand the problem and i understand my mistake.
I hope that my mistake and your replies to my posts will be able to
help other people that, without malice like me, could commit the same
error.
Thanks
Paolo

 

[Thomas Fritsch]

Ok, Andrew

i understand the problem and i understand my mistake.
I hope that my mistake and your replies to my posts will be able to
help other people that, without malice like me, could commit the same
error.
Thanks
Paolo

Hi Paolo,

may be it is not your mistake only, but also a mistake/restriction of
google.groups which you use for posting.

Apparently google.groups doesn't offer cross-posting (writing one
message, and posting it to several groups simultaneously). Therefore
people --including you-- tend to multi-posting (writing several equal
messages, and posting each of them to another single group), when they
have an urgent question.

I wish more people would use conventional news-clients (like Mozilla,
Outlook, Opera, 40tude, ... ...) instead of this annoying google.groups
thing. :-(

 

[Andrew Thompson]

.

Apparently google.groups doesn't offer cross-posting (writing one
message, and posting it to several groups simultaneously).

I had been wonderring that for a while. This document[1]
suggests otherwise[2].

[1]
<http://groups-beta.google.com/support/bin/static.py?page=glossary.html>
"cross-post vi Cross-posting allows you to post a message
simultaneously to several forums , as opposed to posting
it repeatedly (once to each forum), causing people to see
it multiple times (considered to be bad form). Cross-posting
should include a "Follow-up To" line that directs responses
to a single follow-up forum. Doing so prevents follow-up
messages from being directed to the wrong forums when only
one part of the original message is being responded to."

[2] To their (minor) credit.

I wish more people would use conventional news-clients (like Mozilla,
Outlook, Opera, 40tude, ... ...) instead of this annoying google.groups
thing. :-(

So do I, but..

a) Not all people have access to the Usenet Newsgroups
through a news client. Some people are limited to access
via via school/college, internet cafe, ..the local library.
Others with a private connection might have an inferior
ISP that offers no news server, and are not savvy enough
to go searching for free-access news servers (which seem
to pop up and disappear on a regular basis).

b) People who post using news clients are not immune to
causing problems either. Let us not forget it is the
operator, rather than the interface, that causes *most*
problems.