Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!paperboy!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: POSIX bashing (actually cooked vs raw or cbreak mode)
Message-ID: <15848@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 16 Apr 91 02:06:46 GMT
References: <71479@brunix.UUCP> <1991Apr10.192226.24909@world.std.com> <1991Apr11.140508.9012@athena.mit.edu>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <1991Apr11.140508.9012@athena.mit.edu> jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:
>  Now, I've never programmed with streams, but I was under the impression that
>it's possible to use them to do something like this.  Can't the user write a
>streams driver that does his line-editing, etc. for him, and set the tty to
>use that driver by default, so that applications that don't muck with the line
>discipline will automatically have whatever interface the user installs?

As I understand it (not programming Streams either), the only streams
modules that you can get the kernel to insert are ones that have been
built into the kernel, i.e. not user-mode code.  That seems to me to
be a major deficiency in the current streams design, although it is
clear why the restriction exists.

>In my opinion, this is the right direction to go.

I would agree, more or less.  Streams certainly open up possibilities.