Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> Aleksej Saushev wrote:
>> I have succeded in building todays CVS version on NetBSD with
>> following changes:
>>
>> --- Makefile.in.orig 2008-05-02 13:21:26.000000000 +0400
>> +++ Makefile.in 2008-05-02 13:27:49.000000000 +0400
>> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-832,7 +832,7 @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> sleep 1 #should make hpux-workaround unnecessary
>>
>> $(FORTH_GEN_ENGINE_FAST): prim-fast.b prims2x.fs
>> - GFORTH="$(FORTHP)" $(srcdir)/gfgen -fast
>> + GFORTH="$(PREFORTH)" $(srcdir)/gfgen -fast
>>
>> $(FORTH_GEN_ENGINE): prim.b prims2x.fs
>> GFORTH="$(PREFORTH)" $(srcdir)/gfgen
>
> Thanks.
>
>> But I still don't know, what is the purpose of libltdl.
>
> To load libraries portably, even on more weird systems than FreeBSD. The
> source of libltdl in the CVS tree is no longer used.
>
>> And there's another problem: gforth spits garbage to the terminal,
>> for instance, I see "bye^[[3Dbye^[[3Dbye" on exit. I.e. gforth
>> doesn't handle terminal output correctly. Could this be fixed?
>
> Yes, use a vt100 compatible terminal.
Could you, please, not recommend me and others what terminal to use?
If I use this terminal, I have reasons. I don't change my terminals
like gloves.
It's Gforth's fault, that it doesn't use standard termcap.
Once again you demonstrate worst sides of Forth (both, language and
community): incompatible and uncooperative.
> I'm quite sick with Unix' terminal
> diversity, there is after all a Standard for terminals, and it builds on
> vt100.
Are you able to point into SUS, where it is explicitly said, that there's
only one terminal, which is VT100?
> <esc>[<num>D moves the cursor back by <num> characters.
<num> backspaces do the same in ASCII, which is what famous ANS suggest.
Anyway, there's standard interface to terminals, if you used it,
it would emit proper control sequence.
--
BECHA...
CKOPO CE3OH...
|
