Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ncar!boulder!stan!dce
From: dce@stan.UUCP (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: A "fix" for wall.
Message-ID: <717@salgado.stan.UUCP>
Date: 2 Apr 89 16:54:50 GMT
References: <8903300011.AA29356@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Reply-To: dce@Solbourne.com (David Elliott)
Organization: Solbourne Computer Inc., Longmont, Colorado
Lines: 21

In article <8903300011.AA29356@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> mouse@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (der Mouse) writes:
>Presumably.  But then lots of things don't work from xterm windows:
>anything depending on getlogin(), for example.  A better solution, from
>this point of view, would be to hack xterm to give it an option to
>leave the host field blank in the utmp entry it writes.

While all of these things solve a specific problem, it might be more
useful to solve the general problem.  That is, I don't see any reason
for wall to send more than one message to a given user/hostname pair
(where "hostname" is loosely defined to allow for xterms and remote
logins to the local machine).  By only sending one message to each
unique user/hostname pair, this handles the case where a user runs all
xterms locally, and the case where a user starts a lot of remote xterms
(I use my 3/50 as an X terminal for a set of faster machines).

If it doesn't show up in comp.sys.sun soon, I will post my modification
to wall that does this.

-- 
David Elliott		...!pyramid!boulder!stan!dce
"Splish splash, I was rakin' in the cash"  -- Eno