Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!cbmvax!vu-vlsi!swatsun!schwartz
From: schwartz@swatsun.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: when using termcap, get it right!
Message-ID: <1158@carthage.swatsun.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-May-87 12:01:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: carthage.1158
Posted: Fri May 29 12:01:50 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 30-May-87 11:13:44 EDT
References: <1149@carthage.swatsun.UUCP> <8601@tekecs.TEK.COM>
Organization: Swarthmore College, Swarthmore PA
Lines: 25
Keywords: termcap, curses
Summary: clarification of termcap complaint

In article <8601@tekecs.TEK.COM>, snoopy@doghouse.gwd.tek.com (Snoopy) writes:
> In article <1149@carthage.swatsun.UUCP> schwartz@swatsun (Scott Schwartz) writes:
> >	n o s p a c e s
> Am I missing something here, or should these termcap entries include
> a backspace to return the curser to where it belongs?
> Why screw up a bunch of code to get around brain-damaged hardware
> if it can be fixed in the termcap entry?

Sorry for not being clear in the first place.  The termcap entry we use entry 
is correct.  It functions perfectly with lots of unix software: 
vi, gnuemacs, etc, etc, etc.

The problem really is that the authors of microemacs and rogue (and probably
other things too) IGNORE the relevent termcap fields.  I know this because
I looked at the source.   In fact, someone once posted a patch for 
uEmacs 3.7 to handle just this problem.  uEmacs 3.8 has been rewritten 
enough that the original fix cannot be naively applied with patch(l).


> Snoopy


-- 
# Scott Schwartz 
# ...{{seismo,ihnp4}!bpa,cbmvax!vu-vlsi,sun!liberty}!swatsun!schwartz