[comp.sys.ibm.pc] VT100 Emulation

mcgregor@ihuxv.ATT.COM (MacGregor) (03/10/89)

Has anyone had success in getting Lotus Corporation's "Symphony" program
to talk to UNIX(tm) environment.  The Symphony program supplies a VT100.app
which when attached causes the COMM mode of Symphony to act like
a DEC VT100 terminal.

Unfortunately, the emulation is not robust.  The emulator does not
accurrately track crusor movements generated by VI.

Has there been an update of the VT100.app or is there a UNIX trick 
that can be invoked.

Terry MacGregor
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Naperville, Illinois  60566
 

marty@homxc.UUCP (M.B.BRILLIANT) (03/11/89)

From article <3228@ihuxv.ATT.COM>, by mcgregor@ihuxv.ATT.COM (MacGregor):
> Has anyone had success in getting Lotus Corporation's "Symphony" program
> to talk to UNIX(tm) environment.  The Symphony program supplies a VT100.app
> .....
> Unfortunately, the emulation is not robust.  The emulator does not
> accurrately track crusor movements generated by VI.

It isn't just Symphony.  I've used (or tried out) VT100 or VT102
emulations in Procomm, ProComm-Plus-TD, Qmodem, Boyan, Telix, and an
old Ptel.  None of them provide a termcap or terminfo entry for the
emulation.  Only Ptel (kudos! kudos!) lists the escape sequences that
the terminal emulation is designed to respond to.  I used the Ptel
specification to write a terminfo entry, and though it had bugs, it was
a good start.  (My Ptel is for sale: $5).

Now that UNIX(R) is becoming a standard (maybe even two standards :-),
I hope we will soon get termcap and terminfo entries from the vendors
of terminal emulators.  At the very least, the vendor of a terminal
emulator should (as Phoenix did for Ptel) document its interface
specifications.

M. B. Brilliant					Marty
AT&T-BL HO 3D-520	(201) 949-1858		Home (201) 946-8147
Holmdel, NJ 07733	att!homxc!marty

Disclaimer: Opinions stated herein are mine unless and until my employer
	    explicitly claims them; then I lose all rights to them.

marty@homxc.UUCP (M.B.BRILLIANT) (03/15/89)

In response to the following:

> ..... I've used (or tried out) VT100 or VT102
> emulations in Procomm, ProComm-Plus-TD, Qmodem, Boyan, Telix, and an
> old Ptel.  None of them provide a termcap or terminfo entry for the
> emulation.  Only Ptel (kudos! kudos!) lists the escape sequences that
> the terminal emulation is designed to respond to.....

I received a reply from Jan Wortelboer supplying a vt100 termcap.
Unfortunately, I destroyed his return address, so I must thank him
publicly.

The termcap he sent works well for ProComm Plus Test Drive, but not
for ProComm 2.4.2.  For ProComm 2.4.2 I have a different termcap that
I picked up on the net.  These termcap entries don't come with the
terminal emulator programs they work with.  Are they supplied on
request, or does some hacker make them up and distribute them?

M. B. Brilliant					Marty
AT&T-BL HO 3D-520	(201) 949-1858		Home (201) 946-8147
Holmdel, NJ 07733	att!homxc!marty

Disclaimer: Opinions stated herein are mine unless and until my employer
	    explicitly claims them; then I lose all rights to them.

jec@nesac2.att.com (John Carter ATLN SADM) (03/19/89)

In article <5895@homxc.UUCP>, marty@homxc.UUCP (M.B.BRILLIANT) writes:
> From article <3228@ihuxv.ATT.COM>, by mcgregor@ihuxv.ATT.COM (MacGregor):
] ] Has anyone had success in getting Lotus Corporation's "Symphony" program
] ] to talk to UNIX(tm) environment.  The Symphony program supplies a VT100.app
] ] .....
] ] Unfortunately, the emulation is not robust.  The emulator does not
] ] accurrately track crusor movements generated by VI.
] 
] It isn't just Symphony.  I've used (or tried out) VT100 or VT102
] emulations in Procomm, ProComm-Plus-TD, Qmodem, Boyan, Telix, and an
] old Ptel.  None of them provide a termcap or terminfo entry for the
] emulation.  Only Ptel (kudos! kudos!) lists the escape sequences that
] the terminal emulation is designed to respond to.  I used the Ptel
] specification to write a terminfo entry, and though it had bugs, it was
] a good start.
[deletions]

Crosstalk XVI version 3.61 (and later, I suppose) and Mirror II provide work-
able VT100 (and most of VT102 in Mirror) emulations.  The default key mappings 
are not the best choices for all UNIX systems (both use Escape as the program's
attention key, and vi and emacs both use Escape - the attention key is
mappable and I use PgDn).

I haven't tried Crosstalk Mark IV or Mirror III (which are competing products
at the next level up from Crosstalk XVI).

Both programs work with the #2 SCCS OSS, which uses split screen, partial
screen scroll, and partial screen reverse scroll.  I consider this application
a better test of VT100 compatibility than either vi or emacs (after 5 years of
trying different VT100 'compatible' terminals and programs for users in 5
states).

Crosstalk handles the color extensions of the X3.64 standard (haven't tried
them with Mirror yet, but expect that it does also).  Color terminals are
used on a number of AT&T products (computers and switching machines) and there
are a limited number of suppliers who produce X3.64 color terminals, either as
their own product, or as an OEM (Data Media in New Jersey).
-- 
USnail: John Carter, AT&T, 401 W. Peachtree, FLOC 2932-6, Atlanta GA 30308
Video:	...att!nesac2!jec    Voice: 404+581-6239
The machine belongs to the company.  The opinions are mine.