unhd (R. G. Desroches II) (09/28/89)
I am using Ultrix-32 V3.2 with a tektronix 4025. I need a termcap that will enable me to use curses and other screen oriented applications. I can't even use vi at the moment and it is really starting to tear at me. Unfortunately, we don't have access to ftp here. Could someone please either send me a termcap or tell me where I could find one thanks in advance -- __________________________________________________________________________ Never let an inanamite object throw you! siesmo!uunet!unh!rgd611 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (09/30/89)
In article <1989Sep28.165050.5839@uunet!unhd> rgd611@uunet!unhd (R. G. Desroches II) writes: >I am using Ultrix-32 V3.2 with a tektronix 4025. I need a termcap ... The Tek4025 is without doubt one of the most poorly designed terminals ever made. I would advise getting a better terminal. However, if you really want to try to use the 4025 with termcap-using programs, here's the best we could come up with: # Tektronix 4025A # The following status modes are assumed for normal operation (replace the # initial "!" by whatever the current command character is): # !COM 29 # NOTE: changes command character to GS (^]) # ^]DUP # ^]ECH R # ^]EOL # ^]RSS T # ^]SNO N # ^]STO 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 # Other modes may be set according to communication requirements. # If the command character is inadvertently changed, termcap can't restore it. # Insert-character cannot be made to work on both top and bottom rows. # Clear-to-end-of-display emulation via !DLI 988 is too groady to use, alas. # There also seems to be a problem with vertical motion, perhaps involving # delete/insert-line, following a typed carriage return. This terminal sucks. # No delays are specified; use "stty ixon -ixany" to enable DC3/DC1 flow control! X5|tek4025a|Tektronix 4025A:\ :al=^K^]ili;:am:bl=^G:bt=^]bac;:bw:CC=^]:cl=^]era;^J^]rup;:co#80:\ :cr=^M:ct=^]sto;:da:db:DC=^]dch %d;:dc=^]dch;:DL=^]dli %d;:dl=^]dli;:\ :DO=^]dow %d;:do=^J:it#8:LE=^]lef %d;:le=^H:li#34:nd=^]rig;:\ :RI=^]rig %d;:\ :rs=!com 29^]del 0^]rss t^]buf^]buf n^]cle^]dis^]dup^]ech r^]eol\ ^]era g^]for n^]pad 203^]pad 209^]sno n^]sto 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73\ ^]wor 0;:\ :SF=^]dow %d;:sf=^J:ta=^I:UP=^]up %d;:up=^K:xo:\ :ce=^]dch 80;:ch=\r^]rig %d;:\ :bs:pt:xx:
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (10/01/89)
(What is this doing in comp.unix.questions? It belongs in comp.terminals. However, followups are now unlikely, so I have not redirected it there.) In article <11192@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >The Tek4025 is without doubt one of the most poorly designed terminals >ever made. Indeed. I have another 4025 termcap, but yours should do the job. Note that the one completely impossible `feature' of the 4025---there is no workaround, short of rewriting the ROM code---is that it confuses keyboard input with computer input during `escape' sequences. That is, if the computer sends ^]rig 23\r to send the cursor right 23 characters, and you happen to press the `l' key while that sequence is working its way across the RS232 cable into the 4025, the 4025 will imagine that the computer sent something like ^]rlig 23\r which either has no effect, or else prints `rlig 23' (I cannot recall which). This `feature' causes trouble more often at low baud rates%, so it is best to keep the 4025 connected at 9600 baud (although it can only write characters to the screen at around 400 per second, it uses all available memory for incoming data, so flow control is rarely a problem). ----- % At 1200 baud, an 8-character sequence takes .067 seconds, giving an `error window' 8 times larger than at 9600 baud (.0083 seconds). -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@cs.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz) (10/04/89)
In article <11192@smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn@smoke (Doug Gwyn) writes: | In article <1989Sep28.165050.5839@uunet!unhd> rgd611@uunet!unhd (R. G. Desroches II) writes: | >I am using Ultrix-32 V3.2 with a tektronix 4025. I need a termcap ... | | The Tek4025 is without doubt one of the most poorly designed terminals | ever made. I would advise getting a better terminal. I was saddled with a whole slew of those boat anchors while working in a pubs department over at Tek. We trashed 'em and bought AnnArbor's (at a quarter of the cost, even considering the Tek internal discount!). One other very bad misfeature (of the *many*) was that repeated insert/delete-character or insert/delete-line didn't actually remove stuff from memory (they did everything with internal linked lists; I saw the spec), and after a while, the display processor couldn't scan enough "jump-to-there... now jump-to-here" memory references during the horizontal trace and got really confused and put multiple cursors on the screen, usually jiggling badly in the process. The only thing that cleared memory was a "clear screen", so 'vi' users tended to hit the ^L a lot if they were doing a lot of relatively confined editing. (Of course, if a user "interrupts" the command sequences being sent by the host, garbage appeared on the screen, so ^L was learned *real* fast...) Tek makes good scopes. The rest? Well, uh, ... Tek makes good scopes... :-) -- /== Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ====\ | on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Hillsboro, Oregon, USA, Sol III | | merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn | \== Cute Quote: "Welcome to Oregon... Home of the California Raisins!" ==/
Kemp@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL (10/06/89)
Randal Schwartz writes: > Tek makes good scopes. The rest? Well, uh, ... Tek makes > good scopes... :-) To be fair, Tek did make a good terminal, the 4107, and in fact I'm typing on one of them right now. At the time it was introduced, it had no competition. We used a lot of them, and never found an application that broke it's VT-100 compatibility. Of course, we also had a 4115; now *that* was a piece of doodoo. Dave Kemp <Kemp@dockmaster.ncsc.mil>