Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!emory!rsiatl!jgd
From: jgd@rsiatl.UUCP (John G. DeArmond)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Vermont Views
Keywords: user interface
Message-ID: <5089@rsiatl.UUCP>
Date: 26 Nov 90 06:51:26 GMT
References: <4999@rsiatl.UUCP> <274AD9FB.218D@tct.uucp>
Organization: Rapid Deployment Systems, Inc. (making go fast things and things go fast)
Lines: 31


>>You are pretty much stuck with vt100/ansi terminals and the AT386
>>terminal as implemented in ISC Unix 2.2 does NOT work.

>These complaints are unfounded.  We use VV under SCO Unix, and I've
>used it under SCO Xenix, and the console is in fact the place where it
>works best.  

Interesting concept.  Stating that my complaining about a problem with the 
configuration that I use is unfounded and then citing another environment
entirely to support the claim.  I should be so bold!  I will restate again.
The AT386 terminal as implemented in ISC Unix 2.2 (key on ISC) installed
on a Compaq DeskPro 33  with the internal Compaq VGA does NOT work.

>And if the behavior isn't right for a given terminal, just edit 
>/etc/vvtermcap; no biggy.

Depends on what one views as prudent use of one's time and in this case,
the client's money.  If you consider it acceptable for a commercial
package of a quite substantial price to require hacking before use,
and f you consider it proper to bill your client for said hacking, then it 
is no big deal.  Otherwise it IS a big deal considering that ISC unix
already comes with a terminfo database that works just fine.

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | "Purveyors of Performance Products 
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. |  to the Trade " (tm)
Marietta, Ga                  | 
{emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd      | "Vote early, Vote often"