Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:58:05 -0800 From: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@acm.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: /bin and /sbin are now dynamically linked Message-ID: <3FC1114D.6060602@acm.org> In-Reply-To: <20031122.120100.16269141.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <p0600201fbbdeea6a2dc1@[128.113.24.47]> <3FBD5CCE.40905@acm.org> <20031121010211.GD84421@saboteur.dek.spc.org> <20031122.120100.16269141.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20031121010211.GD84421@saboteur.dek.spc.org> > Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org> writes: > : On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 04:31:10PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > : > * /rescue/vi is currently unusable if /usr is missing because > : > the termcap database is in /usr. One possibility > : > would be to build a couple of default termcap entries > : > into ncurses or into vi. > : > : My suggested candidates are vt100 and cons25. The comconsole port installs > : an /etc/ttys entry using vt100. This is also the default terminal type for > : most dialup entries. > > Timing Solutions uses the following minimal termcap for its embedded > applications. It has a number of terminals that it supports, while > still being tiny. it is 3.5k in size, which was the goal ( < 4k block > size we were using). One could SED this down by another 140 bytes or > so. Removing the comments and the verbose names would net another 300 > odd bytes. > > The terminals supported are vt220, vt102, vt100, xterm, xterms, > cons25w, cons25 and ansi. This seems a reasonable number: neither too > few, nor too many. It lets people connect 'normal' terminals to the > serial port (most PCs have vt100/vt220 emulation), as well as PC to PC > connection on the console or xterm. > > I'd be happy to commit this as /etc/termcap.tiny. vi could then look > for both termcap and termcap.tiny and things would just work. > > Comments? Sounds like a good idea to me. I only wonder if it makes sense to commit it as /rescue/termcap.tiny to make the purpose clear? I see no point in trying to prune any smaller. As you point out, it's already smaller than a typical block size. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FC1114D.6060602>