From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Feb  7 21:14:34 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id VAA25469 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 7 Feb 1995 21:14:34 -0800
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA25461 for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 1995 21:14:11 -0800
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA08794
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Tue, 7 Feb 1995 23:11:19 -0600
Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA07024; 7 Feb 95 23:10:27 CST (Tue)
Received: (from peter@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id XAA07021; Tue, 7 Feb 1995 23:10:26 -0600
From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
Message-Id: <199502080510.XAA07021@bonkers.taronga.com>
Subject: Re: sup: Ok, I'm gonna do it.
To: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com (Joe Greco)
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 23:10:26 -0600 (CST)
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <9502080454.AA08579@brasil.moneng.mei.com> from "Joe Greco" at Feb 7, 95 10:54:47 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 472       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I've had some bad luck in the past with vt102, particularly with xterms -  I
> would agree that it works fine in a majority of the cases, but considering
> that vt102 includes vt100am to begin with, I don't think it's unreasonable
> to include vt100...   :-)   (xterm on the other hand is a full blown entry 
> of its own).

That makes sense. For install, it should be possible to make an xterms entry
that uses vt100 or vt102 as well, maybe. Let me look at termcaps...