Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:46:35 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW/HEADSUP] tty drivers mega-patch Message-ID: <20040714184635.GB5503@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <200407141839.i6EIcvce025710@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <20040714180816.GA5503@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net> <200407141839.i6EIcvce025710@gw.catspoiler.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 11:38:57AM -0700, Don Lewis wrote: > > > > Seriously: the origin of cua is mostly lost and systems like UUCP > > have already been removed from the source tree. Anybody new to > > FreeBSD and who hasn't been around since the epoch will completely > > fail to see why the device is called the way it is. > > I still use cu(1), though I don't know why the man page suggests using > the /dev/ttyXX device. The /etc/remote file uses the cua device. I use cu(1) too, but always with the -l option. Probably because I'm too lazy to setup a system name. Also: the fact that we have fingerfriendly shortcuts in /etc/remote as well as calling them that way is sufficient indication that cua* is just plain non-obvious and ackward to a lot of users. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040714184635.GB5503>