Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!himacdonald From: himacdonald@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Hamish Macdonald) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: TERMINFO to TERMCAP conversion. Message-ID: <23100@watdragon.waterloo.edu> Date: 10 Apr 90 15:52:15 GMT References: <9237@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> <461@svcs1.UUCP> <=5R2.MAxds13@ficc.uu.net> Sender: himacdonald@watdragon.waterloo.edu Distribution: na Organization: University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 22 In-reply-to: meissner@osf.org's message of 10 Apr 90 14:26:33 GMT >>>>> On 10 Apr 90 14:26:33 GMT, meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) said: Michael> In article <=5R2.MAxds13@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net Michael> (Peter da Silva) writes: | I said: [Termcap is OK, and it's extensible] | | > It's not all that extensiable, it still has the absurd 1024 byte limit | > (and yes I have run into that limit with a vt320 description). | | True, but that's fixable. I've already suggested having a compiled version | (basically a hashed index table into the entries). Michael> It is not fixable without fixing all of the old crufty programs that Michael> have hardwired 1024 arrays. Didn't all these 'crufty old programs' have to be 'fixed' to use terminfo rather than termcap?? Seems to me to be the same problem. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- watmath!watdragon!himacdonald himacdonald@watdragon.waterloo.edu "Guns seldom solve any problems; they merely decide whose will shall prevail for the time being." - Brian Jarvis