Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Setting TERM
Message-ID: <2746@sun.uucp>
Date: Mon, 2-Sep-85 04:30:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2746
Posted: Mon Sep  2 04:30:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Sep-85 04:49:47 EDT
References: <180@ukecc.UUCP> <56@cbnap.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 28

> No, Please don't re-invent this square wheel!  This "feature" of BSD unix
> is not a good idea for several reasons.  The strongest being that in many
> environments today, the terminals are connected through some sort of network
> and it is not possible to know what kind of tty is connected through any
> port.

Erroneous thinking.  This feature of BSD UNIX *is* a good idea because in
many environments today, the terminals are directly wired to the machine and
it is possible to know what kind of tty is connected through a particular
port.  The fact that it doesn't work in other environments is hardly a
reason to get rid of it - just define all the terminals as "unknown" or
somesuch if you suffer from such an environment.

> Using ansi standard terminals, it is possible to dynamically determine
> the terminal type (we use this, albeit with mixed success since many
> terminals are not ansi standard yet).

I wasn't aware that there was an ANSI registry of responses to a "request
for terminal type" control sequence.  (I'm not even sure there's an ANSI
standard "reqeust for terminal type" sequence, but I don't have X3.64 at
hand to check.)

> Just my opinion, (I know many sites without networks use this, don't
> flame me)

Think before typing and you'll be less likely to be flamed.

	Guy Harris