🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1993Jan20.154800.24726@infodev.cam.ac.uk> kmj1000@cus.cam.ac.uk (K.M. Jeary) writes:
>Is there any significant advantage to be gained by, for example, defining
>the VT420 as a vt200, compared to a vt100? Does anybody have an entry for
>a (at a guess) vt400, and does it differ significantly from/have any advantage
>over the vt100 entry?

There is no large advantage.  I would recommend using as highly-defined a
termcap as possible... just for cursor optimization.  However, you are
likely:
 1) running them at 9600(or more) bps -- cursor movement optimization
    becomes pretty much a moot point at that speed.
 2) If you're like most places, server consoles could be just as well
    replaced with a Decwriter IV -- low use, basically a log of messages.

It would probably be just fine to run as vt100, vt102, vt200/220, vt300/320
- whatever you have termcap(/info) entries for.  I have an extensive
terminfo entry for a VT320 if you're interested.  The one Sun ships has a
few problems.

>We run 3 4/690s under SunOS 4.1.2.

Do you have any job openings ? :-)

-Adam Thompson
 thompsn@ccu.umanitoba.ca
-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Adam Thompson        University of Manitoba        Computer Services |
| Adam_Thompson@umanitoba.ca                  OLC Project - Unix Group |