I don't know if this is a SPARC-specific issue or an xterm issue or ... ?

This morning our mail server was shut down.  The "normal" message in my
xterm windows on my IPC that runs SunOS 4.1.3 was

Broadcast Message at 6:28 ...

        *** FINAL Shutdown message for mipl7 from tcg@mipl7 ***

mipl7 going down IMMEDIATELY
        ...Fixing license manager. Back up Real Soon.

Meanwhile, on my IPC running NetBSD/SPARC 1.0beta (Theo's last snapshot, and
the old X11 R5 binaries - I'm in the middle of building R6 (-: ), they read:

                  Shutdown message for mipl7 from tcg@mipl7 ***
                                                                               
                                                  
                                r. Back up Real Soon.

Lots of characters dropped.  Anyone else run into this?

(Interestingly, if I manually rwall the NetBSD host, there's no lossage.  Hmmn)

Speaking of R6, I applied the patch graciously supplied by our friends down
in Oz to a vanilla R6 patched with fixes 01 through 04.
I ran into two failed patches:

--------------------------
|*** 1.1        1994/07/22 13:04:31
|--- config/imake/imake.c       1994/08/07 17:07:50
--------------------------
Patching file config/imake/imake.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 674.
Hunk #2 failed at 862.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 872.
2 out of 3 hunks failed--saving rejects to config/imake/imake.c.rej
...
--------------------------
|*** 1.1        1994/07/21 16:58:43
|--- programs/Xserver/hw/sun/sunIo.c    1994/07/21 16:59:32
--------------------------
Patching file programs/Xserver/hw/sun/sunIo.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 166.
1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to programs/Xserver/hw/sun/sunIo.c.rej

and also:

--------------------------
|*** 1.1        1994/07/20 20:57:08
|--- programs/Xserver/hw/sun/sunCfb.c   1994/08/07 16:45:28
--------------------------
Patching file programs/Xserver/hw/sun/sunCfb.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 246 (offset 13 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 267 (offset 13 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 359 (offset 13 lines).

At first I thought "Maybe the patch wasn't made against patchlevel 4", but
e.g. sunIo.c and sunCfb.c are only patched in fix-02.  Was the patch created
against a patched-with-fix-01 (only) tree?

Is it worth it to come up with an updated version that is against fix-04?
I'll do it if someone thinks it's worthwhile ...

	- Greg


------------------------------------------------------------------------------