Re: need terminfo for serial console?

[Alex Thiel]

On Monday 29 April 2002 13:49, Dr. Tilmann Bubeck wrote:
> --- Christoph Plattner <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > to cover all aspects of the TERM-I/O stuff, also the tty (in ourcase the
> > serial)
> > flow control has to be added. XON/OFF or even RTS/CTS flow control
> > (XON/OFF is
> > really missed by me, perhaps I will add it, if I have a good idea to
> > implement
> > this in "polling" mode !).
> >
> > But if we really think about that "big step" then we should do a
> > reconstruction.
> > We should add a "virtual terminal" for the VGA/keyboard to have one TTY
> > inter-
> > face to control one well defined interface wiyh TERMIOS. So the terminal
> > setting should be a "terminal" not at "serial" !
> >
> > BUT BUT BUT
> > Do we really want this whole stuff ?
> > Is it not an overkill for an boot loader ?
>
> Well, I'm not sure. I changed from lilo to grub mainly because it is able
> to do much more on the command line before booting the operating itself. I
> see this as a very big advantage. I see grub as a "mini-OS" before booting
> the real one. For this it is important to properly support keyboard/screen
> even at serial console.
>
> You were right, if this would be a very BIG thing to implement, but because
> we only need a few functions of terminfo this is not very big. I think that
> a few hundreds line should be enough.
>
> I looked at char_io.c and found the following escapes which are to be
> converted to terminfo:
>
> cursor_left, cursor_right, cursor_address (goto_xy), clear,
> cursor-position-request, bold-on/off
>
> This should be quite easy to do?
>
> The approach you showed (terminal layer between program and console) seems
> very good and not too hard to archieve. Or am I wrong?
>
> Till
>

So if it's easy to implement, why don't you supply this as a patch? After all 
it is you who wants this feature and if it is not even worthwhile for 
you to implement this who will ever need it?

Cheers,
        Alex