Re: [Linuxconsole-dev] Progress on Sapphire

[Eric S. R. <es...@th...>]

Dominik Kubla <dom...@un...>:
> The 2.2.1 patch of mine had much more in it then just simple vt102
> related fixes (some of the control sequences are for vt220 and up).
> But i guess they can stay. So if you'll send me your version of the patch,
> i will base the 2.2 branch on that.

Enclosed.

> One question arise: should i bother to backport the 2.2 stuff to 2.0?
> Given the fact that 2.0 is still seen as somewhat more stable than
> 2.2 and that it appears to be a one-timer (since there won't be too
> many new 2.0 release).  I would say yes.

I doubt there's much extra work involved as the console driver hasn't changed
that fast.  So we might as well ship for 2.0 as well.
 
> > BTW, in the revised console_codes(4) page, I refer to the existing
> > console as `version 1'.  You and I are working on `version 2', emulation
> > patches only.  Versions 3 and up will be the big rewrite.
> 
> VT320 terminals provide a secondary and tertiary DA, which i am likely to
> implement to give the user-land an idea about the version of the console
> emulator.
> 
> Secondary DA:
> 
> Request:  CSI > 0 c
> Reply:    CSI > 41 ; Pv ; 0 c     (where Pv is the firmware revision)

OK.  To make version comparisons easier later on, I suggest we return
"200" for the first version.

> Tertiary DA:
> 
> Request:  CSI = 0 c
> Reply:    DCS ! | D...D ST        (where D...D is the device id)
> 
> Haven figured out a use for the tertiary DA yet.  Using the hostid
> as device id has the same implications as the Unique Processor ID
> of Pentium III cpus (ignoring the fact that hostid is in widespread
> use in the Unix world)

I think I'd stay away from that.

This reminds me.  What do your canned responses to the Keyboard Status, 
Data Integrity check, and DECREQTPARM actually mean?   I want to mention this
in the man page.  (I was able to find docs on the printer and UDK status).
-- 
		<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr">Eric S. Raymond</a>

As with the Christian religion, the worst advertisement for Socialism
is its adherents.
	-- George Orwell