From:	CRDGW2::CRDGW2::MRGATE::"SMTP::CRVAX.SRI.COM::RELAY-INFO-VAX" 26-JUN-1990 11:52:11.70
To:	MRGATE::"ARISIA::EVERHART"
CC:	
Subj:	Re: terminal beep control

Received:  by crdgw1.ge.com (5.57/GE 1.70)
	 id AA09918; Tue, 26 Jun 90 10:10:06 EDT
Received: From UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU by CRVAX.SRI.COM with TCP; Tue, 26 JUN 90 06:17:59 PDT
Received: by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.63/1.41)
	id AA26511; Tue, 26 Jun 90 06:13:42 -0700
Received: from USENET by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU with netnews
	for info-vax@kl.sri.com (info-vax@kl.sri.com)
	(contact usenet@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU if you have questions)
Date: 26 Jun 90 12:12:55 GMT
From: bacchus.pa.dec.com!decatl!shlump.nac.dec.com!cheese.enet.dec.com!kaiser@decwrl.dec.com
Organization: DEC Systems Consulting Group
Subject: Re: terminal beep control
Message-Id: <12849@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Sender: info-vax-request@kl.sri.com
To: info-vax@kl.sri.com


In article <JYM.90Jun25140133@eris.berkeley.edu>, jym@eris.berkeley.edu (Jym
Dyer) writes...

> |G|iven the undocumented effects of <ESC>[154q and <ESC>[155q on the VT100
> terminals, it should be no suprise that people would think such a thing.

Jym, you wicked fellow!  Don't you know that no one should ever, ever issue
those sequences on a real (non-clone, non-VT125) VT100?  And they should
certainly never issue this:

	<ESC>[2;9y

---Pete

kaiser@cheese.enet.dec.com
+1 508 480 4345 (machine: +1 617 641 3450)