[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

modem gives BUSY when trying to send sms.



Hello,
 
I have a Debian system with kernel 2.6.13.4. (let's call it system2)
On COM1 i use an external modem and i have program i installed with
apt-get named sms_client.
I have the same setup (external model, debian) on another system
(system1) which does exactly the same.
On the older system (system1) it works perfect, but on system2 (the new
one) it doesn't work.
The program works, it tries to connect and then it says that it gets a
BUSY response and on system1, it connects and sends the sms without a
problem.
So i know that the line is okay, the modem is okay, then what is the
problem ... ?
Very strange, i changed the external modems from system1 (the working
one) to system2 but it stays the same.
anybody know how this is possible ?
 
thnx,
Phil.
 
 
 
Created Lockfile '/var/lock/LCK..ttyS0'
MODEM: Toggle DTR 1000000 Microseconds
MODEM: Toggle DTR 1000000 Microseconds
MDM_send: Drain required.
WARNING: read() Timeout
Written String: +<CR>+
Written String: +<CR>+
Written String: +ATE0<CR>+
Received String: +<CR><CR>ATE0<CR><CR><LF>+
Received String: +OK<CR><LF>+
MODEM: Setting Local Modem Echo to OFF
Written String: +AT<CR>+
Received String: +<CR><LF>+
MODEM: Modem echo is set to OFF
Received String: +OK<CR><LF>+
MODEM: Sending Initialization string ATZ<CR> to modem
Written String: +ATZ<CR>+
MODEM: Waiting for Initialization to complete...
Received String: +<CR><LF>+
Received String: +OK<CR><LF>+
MODEM: Initialization complete
MODEM: Pause before dialing
MODEM: Sleeping for 1000000 Microseconds...
MODEM: Dialing
MODEM: Sending dial string ATDT<CR> to modem
Written String: +ATDT<CR>+
MODEM: Waiting for Connection...
Received String: +ATDT<CR><CR><LF>+
Received String: +BUSY<CR><LF>+
MODEM: Expecting CONNECT response - BUSY
Removing Lockfile '/var/lock/LCK..ttyS0'
Process completed for service 'proximus'
Total Elapsed Time: 42 Seconds
Removing Lockfile '/var/lock/smslock'
secsquid:/etc/smsclient#



Reply to: