On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 22:43, fredex wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 08:58:37PM -0500, Scot L. Harris wrote:
Why not use kermit? I believe it has good vt100 support and is part of FC2 and probably FC3.
Kermit is great, I use it all the time.
But it is not a terminal emulator. Well, C-kermit isn't. K95 is and MS-Kermit
is, but C-kermit is not. You get ONLY whatever the capabilities are of the terminal you're actually using when you run C-kermit, no more, no less.
It is usually possible to make do that way, but sometimes you have a remote
app/system that demands some known terminal type other than the one you have.
Fred
Heck! Why did they mess with kermit? That used to be THE tool to use across all kinds of systems. Wonder if you can still get the tape with all the different versions on it?
They didn't mess with kermit - it's a difference between how you drive terminals on Unix versus how you drive one on Windows or whatever.
-- Ed Wilts, RHCE Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:ewilts@xxxxxxxxxx Member #1, Red Hat Community Ambassador Program
