prindle@nadc (01/19/85)
Does anyone know that there is a lengthy dissertation in the UNIX manual (TERMCAP (5)) which tells you exactly how to define a termcap entry for any terminal as long as you know what it can do, and what it can't! For the umpteenth time, there is no such thing as a termcap entry for a *computer*! There can only be a termcap entry for a computer/terminal-emulation-program combination, and it is 99% dependent on the terminal-emulation-program. If you are using a dumb terminal program, then you might as well settle for a terminal type of "du" and use "vi" in the "open" mode; no amount of diddling with a termcap entry will make your terminal program any smarter. Also, even if you define a perfect termcap entry for your computer/program combo, many programs are hopelessly frustrated (eg. rogue) or lose information (eg. emacs) when the screen width is less than 80 columns; vi is the most adaptable.
William Chops Westfield <BillW@SU-SCORE> (01/19/85)
Well, i almost agree with you. Some PCs have a built in terminal emulator, and so it is ok to ask for a termcap for a DEC rainbow, or an H89, or an HP150. Frequently the problem with writing you own termcap is that you dont know what the PC in question can do. there are plenty of programs that say things like "emulates a vt100", while neglecting to tell you that scolling regions aren't implemented. Telling someone to write their own termcap is in some cases akin to telling someone to write a terminal emulator that emulates some terminal already in termcap! For people that request termcaps, you should be aware that in most cases, the type of software that you are running is just as important as the hardware, so requests should be "does anyone have a termcap for the Vic20 running version 4 of VicTalk from unfriendly software inc?". Also, there are a number of "standard" terminals that are "likely" to be emulated if anything at all is emulated. In decreasing order of capability, these are: VT100 (ANSI), VT52, ADM3A - you can try out these termcaps (or variations thereof reflecting real length and width of the screen), before requesting some other termcap... BillW
werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (01/19/85)
[chomp - crack ..... my kingdom for a dentist] ever since first encountering "termcaps", and every time I have to deal with one again, I've done "wishful thinking" for a program, which accepts a termcap as input, and gives you an annotated listing of what the attributes described in the termcap are "in English". A little interactive program allowing you to set / modify parameters from a menu-driven interface also seemed reasonable to long for. Alas, I never followed up and asked around or went off into my corner to write some code ... anyone care to make my day ??? (and, undoubtedly, of many, many millions and billions .... ) [is that the sun rising over the garden fence ???? just another day of blue sky and temperatures in the 70s - sigh, and I'll sleep right through it .. ]
rsellens@watdcsu.UUCP (Rick Sellens - Mech. Eng.) (01/23/85)
Re: no termcaps for a *computer* In general you can't define a termcap for a computer, but there are some machines which have screen handling capabilities built into the console device driver. In particular ANSI.SYS on the IBM PC is supposed to make the pc console react to ANSI terminal escapes. Apparently it is a little buggy, but with a transparent (keyboard to RS232_out, RS232_in to console) terminal program you can get a reasonable facsimile of a full screen terminal, provided you are using an *appropriate* termcap entry. Because of this there has been a fair bit of traffic in "termcaps for the IBM PC" which cover the appropriate subset of the ANSI stuff. Rick Sellens UUCP: watmath!watdcsu!rsellens CSNET: rsellens%watdcsu@waterloo.csnet ARPA: rsellens%watdcsu%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
gordon@sneaky.UUCP (01/27/85)
> /* Written 1:23 pm Jan 23, 1985 by watdcsu!rsellens in sneaky:net.micro */ > > Re: no termcaps for a *computer* > > In general you can't define a termcap for a computer, but there are > some machines which have screen handling capabilities built into > the console device driver. In particular ANSI.SYS on the IBM PC is > supposed to make the pc console react to ANSI terminal escapes. > ... > > Rick Sellens > /* End of text from sneaky:net.micro */ That's funny, I wasn't aware that the console device driver was implemented in hardware that couldn't be gotten around by any means. There are plenty of different operating systems that run on the IBM PC, and Xenix, among others, never heard of ANSI.SYS, even if it has similar capability. It also isn't unheard of for terminal emulator programs to go direct to the hardware on both screen and communications devices to speed things up, get around operating system bugs, or just do things differently. Gordon Burditt ...!ihnp4!sys1!sneaky!gordon ...!convex!ctvax!trsvax!sneaky!gordon