[net.info-terms] VT-100 on DG Ecliplse?

epm0@bunny.UUCP (Erik Mintz) (08/27/85)

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR BOAT ANCHOR ***

In the near future I am going to find myself working on a Data General
AP-130 Eclipse system, runing AOS. Has anyone managed to get SED (or
anything requiring cursor control) to work with a VT-100 type terminal?
I would very much appreciate any pointers on how to make this work.

Please respond by mail; I can't imagine that many people are interested
in this topic.
-- 
Erik Mintz

ARPA or CSnet : epm0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay
UUCP: ...harvard!bunny!epm0

epm0@bunny.UUCP (Erik Mintz) (09/05/85)

I found a surprisingly large amount of interest in the idea of
using a VT-100 type terminal on a Data General system (AOS).
Many thanks to all who replied.

Unfortunately, the answers are quite discouraging. Apparently the cursor
control codes are wired directly into the editor program (SED), and thus
can not be altered. There is a way to tell AOS about your terminal, but
this only allows you to terminate commands with a CR instead of New
line, and will not help programs that use direct cursor addressing. The
best one can do is edit in line mode. I guess I will just have to move a
Dasher beside my VT-100.
-- 
Erik Mintz

ARPA or CSnet : epm0%gte-labs.csnet@csnet-relay
UUCP: ...harvard!bunny!epm0

gnu@l5.uucp (John Gilmore) (09/09/85)

When I worked at DG in '79 or '80 or so, their editors and terminal
software was a strange combination of advanced and primitive.  It was
advanced in that the shell and various other programs used flexible
kernel facilities to give you command line editing, including cursor
motions and insert/delete (as well as word-erase and
lop-one-off-the-end and kill-whole-line).  On the other hand, the
control characters that would do this were wired in to all the programs
and the kernel.  DG had only built two or three terminals at the time,
so this was no big deal, and part of their strategy when selling you a
system was to get you to buy 5 or 10 or 50 of their terminals at the
same time.  They probably made more on the terminals than on the CPUs!
(I remember hearing someone brag that the new Dasher terminal -- in the
plastic case, not in the metal U-bracket with tilt and swivel) would
cost under $200 to build and would sell for $1800.)

Given these economics, their software certainly had to enforce that
you wouldn't just buy ADM-3A's with your inexpensive DG cpu.

These days you could run DG/UX under AOS, I think, if you want generic
terminal support.  Or does DG/UX only run on Eagles (MV series)?