[BusyBox] [PATCH] New comm applet

[Rainer Weikusat]

Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> writes:
> On Saturday 02 April 2005 10:13 pm, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> >> > And yes, less is cool.  I'd personally prefer one that didn't mess
>> >> > with $TERM or curses and just belted out ANSI sequences (a >20 year
>> >> > old standard everything out there understands)...
>> >>
>> >> This assumption is wrong. The last time I was forced to use a genuine
>> >> text terminal that did not support ANSI escape sequences was about two
>> >> years ago. Emacs supplies a 'dumb' terminal in shell mode. Different
>> >> terminal emulators have different bugs in there control code.
>> >
>> > For our purposes, the assumption is correct.
>>
>> ... which is just a somewhat indirect way to confess that it isn't.
>
> Are you saying you believe that the primary context of messages posted on the 
> busybox mailing list is other than what should or should not be used in/added 
> to busybox?

No, because if so, than I would have written it.

[...]

>> And your statement is - of course - still wrong.
>
> You know, combined with your previous sentence about a lack of supporting 
> arguments, I'm really starting to suspect you're trolling.

This is not an uncommon thing to do for people who are facing
"difficulties" when propagating their politics as technical facts.

[...]

>> > There is no NEED for terminfo anymore, it's just outputting different
>> > emulations that are then intrerpreted by software.
>>
>> Would you please reread this sentence very carefully:
>>
>> 	The last time I was forced to use a genuine text terminal that
>> 	did not support ANSI escape sequences was about two years ago.
>
> Are you saying you were trying to use recent general-purpose Linux software on 
> that system?

FreeBSD, actually, but this doesn't really matter: Just because newer
text terminals (which are still sold) are probably all ANSI compliant,
older ones, which are certainly still in use, insofar they still work,
may not. To not support non-ANSI terminals because the increase in
code size is considered to be not worth it, given the benefit to a
supposedly very small user base only is valid point. To claim that
'very small' is the same as 'nobody' isn't.