Re: Call for libtermcap ressurection from the dead

2000-09-16 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 03:38:33AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > Fine with me, provided you handle any problems with mixing the libraries. > I think "-ltermcap -lcurses" should somehow use the curses interfaces > despite termcap being first. Yes, I fix this occurances recently just for purity reaso

Re: Call for libtermcap ressurection from the dead

2000-09-16 Thread Bruce Evans
On Sat, 16 Sep 2000, Bill Fumerola wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 04:23:42AM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > > Avdantages: > > > > 1) We'll be 100%-compatible with all libtermcap programs again. > > 2) Save LOTS of space for static binaries since libtermcap is extremally > > small. > > > >

Re: Call for libtermcap ressurection from the dead

2000-09-15 Thread Bill Fumerola
On Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 04:23:42AM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > Avdantages: > > 1) We'll be 100%-compatible with all libtermcap programs again. > 2) Save LOTS of space for static binaries since libtermcap is extremally > small. > > Opinions? I don't object. The namespace collisions in src/

Call for libtermcap ressurection from the dead

2000-09-15 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
I just found today yet another ncurses tgoto emulation bug (now can't handle "%.", triggered by 'screen') and am angry-motivated enough for this proposal. Avdantages: 1) We'll be 100%-compatible with all libtermcap programs again. 2) Save LOTS of space for static binaries since libtermcap is ext