On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, James Rich wrote: > On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Scott Klement wrote: > > > > I've worked over my enhanced 5250 protocol patch and now tn5250 supports > > > cursor progression! The bad part is that 5250 windows are broken. That's > > > because with cursor progression, the 5250 defines a new window > > > create/destroy method that I haven't completely implemented yet, so 5250 > > > windows are a bit... crashy. > > > > Am I correct in assuming that it's only "crashy" if you specify the > > +enhanced option to tn5250? I've fixed the crashes now. The problem was that I hadn't added the appropriate functions to the terminal objects. I've added them in and created a new patch. This new patch also includes some fixes to a few other things in session.c. The patch is at the same place: http://www.chowhouse.com/~james/x5250/enhanced.patch With this patch cursor progression works correctly. 5250 "windows" create problems (though not crashes anymore). The window border attributes get placed all over the screen. I haven't been able to figure out yet what is supposed to happen when we get a CREATE WINDOW Structured Field order. It looks like the as/400 uses ErasetoAddress to "cut a hole" in the screen buffer at the location of the window. If there is more than one window on the screen then I don't see how the as/400 indicates which window we're dealing with, especially if one of those windows is destroyed. There doesn't seem to be any way for the 5250 protocol to indicate to delete a given window created with the CREATE WINDOW Structured Field order. Anyway, try out the patch and you will see what I mean. No more crashes, but ugly windows :( James Rich Vs lbh cynl n Zvpebfsg PQ onpxjneqf, lbh pna urne fngnavp zrffntrf. Ohg rira jbefr, vs lbh cynl vg sbejneq, vg vafgnyyf gurve fbsgjner! -- Fcbgvphf ba /.