[Info-vax] SET TERM /TTSYNC on ancient VMS versions

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2018-08-16 19:45, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
> Den 2018-08-16 kl. 18:43, skrev Chris:
>> On 08/16/18 16:52, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Not entirely true. DEC terminals always had support for DTR/DSR. But
>>> that is used to indicate if something is connected or not, and is not
>>> used for flow control. The DTR/DSR is also included in the MMJ.
>>> All DEC terminals have flow control using XON/XOFF. I'm trying to
>>> remember if maybe VT05 might be an exception, but I think not. But all
>>> terminals after the VT05 definitely have XON/XOFF flow control.
>>
>> Using RT11 in the late eighties, control s , control q worked for
>> scrolling, but pretty sure the vt220 could be setup from full
>> modem control or xon / xoff.
> 
> Didn't the setup screens had a "flow control" option that on many
> terminals could be set to "soft", "hard" or "none"?
> "Soft" was Xon/Xoff, hard was the "modem lines" (I remember it as
> CTS/CTR or similar but doesn't matter) and "none" was, well, none...

That did eventually come, yes. I decided to look it up in the manuals, 
and hardware flow control in DEC terminals actually only came in the 
VT500-series.

> And yes, as the name implies, the modem control lines might originally
> have been meant for modem control, but they works just as well for flow
> control, if you want to.

If you want to, and if you decide to use the signals in a different way 
than the standard says, yes. The actual way it is defined that these 
signals work, and are to be used, does not make it possible to use them 
for flow control. Using them for flow control essentially violates the 
standard.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol