bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Dan Nicolaescu]

These terminal types are not supported by terminfo, so probably they are
long dead.  This code can be cleaned up whenever cleanups are allowed.

  /* Special handling for certain terminal types known to need it */

  if (!strcmp (terminal_type, "supdup"))
    {
      terminal->memory_below_frame = 1;
      tty->Wcm->cm_losewrap = 1;
    }
  if (!strncmp (terminal_type, "c10", 3)
      || !strcmp (terminal_type, "perq"))
    {

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu> writes:

> These terminal types are not supported by terminfo, so probably they are
> long dead.  This code can be cleaned up whenever cleanups are allowed.
>
>   /* Special handling for certain terminal types known to need it */
>
>   if (!strcmp (terminal_type, "supdup"))
>     {
>       terminal->memory_below_frame = 1;
>       tty->Wcm->cm_losewrap = 1;
>     }
>   if (!strncmp (terminal_type, "c10", 3)
>       || !strcmp (terminal_type, "perq"))
>     {

I think cleaning up this now would be OK, but how do we know that these
three terminal types aren't supported?  Is there a list somewhere?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu> writes:
>
>> These terminal types are not supported by terminfo, so probably they are
>> long dead.  This code can be cleaned up whenever cleanups are allowed.
>>
>>   /* Special handling for certain terminal types known to need it */
>>
>>   if (!strcmp (terminal_type, "supdup"))
>>     {
>>       terminal->memory_below_frame = 1;
>>       tty->Wcm->cm_losewrap = 1;
>>     }
>>   if (!strncmp (terminal_type, "c10", 3)
>>       || !strcmp (terminal_type, "perq"))
>>     {
>
> I think cleaning up this now would be OK, but how do we know that these
> three terminal types aren't supported?  Is there a list somewhere?

/etc/termcap or the terminfo datatbase, none of them has these...

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org> writes:

> /etc/termcap or the terminfo datatbase, none of them has these...

Could /etc/termcap files on other OSs have these?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> /etc/termcap or the terminfo datatbase, none of them has these...
>
> Could /etc/termcap files on other OSs have these?

Doubtful, AFAIK /etc/termcap on GNU/Linux is the most comprehensive of its kind.

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Andreas Schwab]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

>>   if (!strcmp (terminal_type, "supdup"))

RFC734

>>       || !strcmp (terminal_type, "perq"))

http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/perq/PERQ_Brochure.pdf

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Dan Nicolaescu]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> writes:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>
>>>   if (!strcmp (terminal_type, "supdup"))
>
> RFC734
>
>>>       || !strcmp (terminal_type, "perq"))
>
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/perq/PERQ_Brochure.pdf

Thank you!

Then it's quite safe to get rid of these.  They are so old and obscure
that they can't have a significant number of users (If they didn't make
it to /etc/termcap in the '80s/'90's it means they were not used much).  
We stopped supporting a lot of old systems a number of years ago, so IMO
these should go the same way.

bug#1482: cleanup: term.c dead code

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org> writes:

> Then it's quite safe to get rid of these.  They are so old and obscure
> that they can't have a significant number of users (If they didn't make
> it to /etc/termcap in the '80s/'90's it means they were not used much).  
> We stopped supporting a lot of old systems a number of years ago, so IMO
> these should go the same way.

I agree.  I've now removed the code in question.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/