Very Computer

Thank you!
Wayne

Quote:> the nice thing about standards is there is so many to choose from.  If anyone
> actualy has a real ansi entry for SCO, let me know, im intrested.  The 6 or

--

  / \_   Dan Everhart                        uunet!{camco,fluke}!dyndata!dan
  \_/ \____________________________          206-743-6982, 742-8604 (fax)
  / \_/                                      7107 179th St SW
  \_/    Dynamic Data & Electronics          Edmonds, WA 98026, USA

"Rhe rone rike, rhe rone rike... rhorane" -- Astro sings "*"

The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
are looking for.

--

Paternalism is like mildew: If you ignore it, it won't just not go away,
it'll grow until you can no longer ignore it, or do anything about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:>The main "MEAT" of this article is based on that SCO users want to be
>compatible with DOS terminal programs that use ANSI.  So far the DOS
>ansi terminal programs all adhere to the same standard.  If SCO adhered
>to the same standards programs such as setcolor would change the color
>on DOS ansi terminals.  Also the SCO entries would handle cursor movement
>controls correctly.  SCO may 'Technically' adhere to ansi, however they dont
>adhere to an ansi standard that is compatible with anything but itself.

>The point here is that SCO's ansi entries lack the compatibility that people
>are looking for.

Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
got.
--
Wu Liu                          Software Engineer, User Interface Group

Quote:>I don't think there is any difference between SCO's implementation of
>the "ansi" termcap/terminfo description and the ANSI standard.

Quote:>Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
>would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
>got.

The point is how or where to get a terminfo entry to suists the
requirements of ansi-pc dos users ? (and unfortunately "dosansi" is not the
solution).

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Unix soit qui mal y pense.

The thing is, it is claiming to be "ansi".  I would guess that DOS systems
are the major uses of ansi terminal emulations.  SCO's termcap has like
6 different entries for "ansi".  Why is this?  If ansi was a standard
then there should only be 1 correct?  I would also guess that 90% of the
people who want to use ansi on SCO boxes are using DOS terminal programs.
Using that theory, one would assume that when you use ansi as a terminal
emulation on a SCO box, you would get proper emulation.  This is not the
case.  In fact I have tried every entry SCO has for ansi and NONE of them
work correctly when using a DOS terminal program.  So something is amiss
here.  Either every DOS program that uses ansi is wrong, and the hundreds
of software and terminal packages that use ansi under DOS are wrong, or
SCO's entries for ansi are wrong.  The vt100 and vt102 emulations work
like a charm under DOS with any terminal program supporting it.  Why is
this?  Do DOS programmers just like vt100 better?  I think not.  This
all comes down to the original post and the original complaint.  SCO's
ansi entries are not worth the disk space they consume.

Quote:

>Besides, it's not that hard to write your own version of setcolor that
>would output the correct set of escape sequences for whatever you've
>got.

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            No Canadian Coins.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

-----

:                              I need either a recommendation for a good
: telecommunications program (preferably for DOS and shareware or freeware
: since I'd like to share it with others, but commercial if need be)
: OR termcap and terminfo entries which will support ansi as popular
: DOS based terminal programs (let's say "Procomm" since it is the best
: of the lot so far) understand it.  I'd appreciate email if possible.

We've used Century Software's TERM for years, for both UNIX and
DOS communications.  Running TERM on a PC (either in DOS or
Windows) and connecting to a UNIX/XENIX host with TERM=ansi,
produces perfect results.  I have used and supported the product
for years and would recommend it without hesitation.

I think the DOS/Windows version is $3-400, with the UNIX version
$6-700 I think.  Century Software is:

Suite c-294
5284 South 320 West
Salt Lake City, UT
84092      Phone (801) 268-3088
FAX 801-268-2772
--
Bill Irwin    -       The Westrheim Group     -    Vancouver, BC, Canada
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
uunet!twg!bill            (604) 431-9600 (voice) |     Your Computer  

At any rate, I've had fairly good luck using the stock SCO vt100
termcap with various PC-based telecom programs, including Telix and
Procomm Plus.  Remember to set the telecom program to VT100 emulation,
not ANSI emulation -- the two are different, and although the escape
codes overlap in places, you *will* have problems if you tell the Unix
system you're a VT100 when you're really emulating ANSI, or vice versa.

--
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you

                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture

The program works as a TSR on DOS allowing you to pop in and out of
Unix on the fly.

--
================== TELESYS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS ==================
Kevin W. Reed                Public *NIX Site and Newsfeed Source

SCO Xenix/Unix Support              Data/UUCP/BBS +1 602 649 9099