Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!maart
From: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Which is more portable:  stty <   or  stty >
Message-ID: <5974@star.cs.vu.nl>
Date: 13 Mar 90 18:22:32 GMT
References: <3354@muffin.cme.nist.gov> <12339@smoke.BRL.MIL> <JV.90Mar13162312@squirrel.mh.nl>
Sender: news@cs.vu.nl
Reply-To: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath)
Organization: VU Informatika, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Lines: 20

In article <JV.90Mar13162312@squirrel.mh.nl>,
	jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) writes:
)...
)	STTY_FLAGS=`stty -g < /dev/tty`
)	sane() { stty ${STTY_FLAGS}; }
)
)You can't do this from your BSD .login .

Indeed.  But if BSD's stty(1) would have had `-g', you *could* have done:

	STTY_FLAGS=`stty -g 2>&1 > /dev/tty`

Csh:
	set STTY_FLAGS="`(stty -g > /dev/tty) |& cat`"

(Both work on SunOS 4.0.3c.)
I agree, however, that the SysV method is easier.
--
 1) Will 4.5BSD have wait5()?         |Maarten Litmaath @ VU Amsterdam:
 2) Sleep(3) should be sleep(2) again.|maart@cs.vu.nl, uunet!mcsun!botter!maart