@gacvax1.bitnet:nop%mcs-server@cunyvm.cuny.edu (nop) (10/23/89)
bryan@cs.utexas.edu (Bryan Bayerdorffer @ Wit's End) writes: > In article <1989Oct21.230047.4726@utstat.uucp> davids@utstat.uucp (David > Scollnik) writes: > =- > =-Does a version of Uw exist for the amiga, such that tektronix > =-emulation is supported ? On the Unix system at work a number of > =- > =-( One might ask ... why not use VLT ?? Well, I do ... but the > =-multiple windowing system Uw offers is not to be sneezed at ... > =-could this possibly be implemented in VLT ?? ( Hello, Authors ?? :-) )) > =- > I think you'd be far better off with a Tek client for DNET. Should be >easier to implement than Tek emulation for either uw or VLT, too. I suspect >one could just take the Tek emulation code from VLT and stick it in fterm. I was just wondering about this the other day: is there a good reason why there isn't a fterm.device? The unit number could be interpreted as a fterm number or a server number. If such a device existed, terminal emulation would be in a different layer from the low level protocol. All the GOOD terminal programs would automatically be able to run over DNet. This would give more kinds of terminal emulation to DNet, such as full vt220, tektronix and whatever else. (Skypix? Hmmm...) It would allow macros and scripts to a DNet host, simplifying automated transactions. Less usefully, file transfer protocols to non-Unix systems accessed through DNet would be possible. (Ever DNet to a VMS system over X29? :-) Jay Carlson nop@GACVAX1.BITNET I hear ANSI is forming a committee to work on netwide standard disclaimers.