Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!fenchurch.mit.edu!jbs From: jbs@fenchurch.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: Input Line Editing Message-ID: <9674@eddie.MIT.EDU> Date: 14 Jul 88 03:23:03 GMT References: <16456@brl-adm.ARPA> <9666@eddie.MIT.EDU> <10443@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <9671@eddie.MIT.EDU> <23839@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Sender: uucp@eddie.MIT.EDU Reply-To: jbs@eddie.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal) Organization: MIT EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA Lines: 15 In article <23839@bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: >[...]if it's done as an intermediate process how >does the process know when to step out of the way because a newly >started job is doing its own style of input editing? As Doug said, kernel support should be provided as necessary. In this case, provide a way for the intermediate process to determine (or be told) that the terminal (perhaps a pseudo-terminal) has been switched out of cooked mode. As has already been pointed out, Emacs shell buffers could use such a service to improve support for input editing. Perhaps I missed this, but shouldn't the question be "How to provide *better* input editing in Unix?" The kernel already provides limited editing capability in cooked mode, yes? Jeff Siegal