Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 12:03:20 -0400 From: Andy Sparrow <spadger@best.com> To: Martin Karlsson <martin.karlsson@visit.se>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: xterm and colour (Was: cvs commit: ports/mail/mutt-devel...) Message-ID: <20020505160320.E8A033E14@CRWdog.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Message from Martin Karlsson <martin.karlsson@visit.se> of "Sat, 04 May 2002 23:19:47 %2B0200." <20020504211946.GB497@foo31-146.visit.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==_Exmh_1715463552P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Most people want to have local xterms Just Work. In mono by default, but > > display color if you run up sysinstall/mutt/ports dialog etc. in an xterm. > > > > They also want remote xterms to display correctly on their local screens. > > Yep. Actually, there's another case that I neglected - running apps within a "foreign" xterm on a FreeBSD system. Very few of the machines I work with in $DAYJOB have heads, so this isn't a problem for me, but it may be the root cause why things are the way they are. > > This used to work perfectly with the color customizations in ~/.Xdefaults and > > Xterm-color (an acceptable hack, IMHO), but this no longer works. > > > > Setting TERM=xterm-color (or some other wonky, non-standard value) to get this > > is not really acceptable (for me at least). > > [...snip...] > > > > I think I've just talked myself into doing the local hack - but it seems > > unnecessary to me, and it pains me when other people say of my favorite OS: > > > > : The xterm-color value for $TERM is a bad choice for XFree86 xterm > > : because it is commonly used for a terminfo entry which happens to > > : not support bce. Complicating matters, FreeBSD (after dithering for > > : a few years on the matter) has a bastardized version which implies > > : the opposite sense of bce, (because it uses SGR 39 and 49), but > > : does not set it. > > And if a FreeBSD-user asks on a non-freebsd list (something like > "Hi, I run freebsd-4.x, how do I get foo to show colour in an > xterm?"), and you reply "xterm-color yadda yadda blah", Thomas > Dickey appear instantly, pointing his finger saying "FreeBSD is bad!" > > Not Fun(TM). I hear that. > > Present behaviour just seems flat-out wrong to me. > > It sure does. Who is responsible? The port (XFree86 ?) maintainer? > Someone else? I believe that the problem is that the system term* stuff doesn't have the correct entries for xterm (e.g. not the stuff that ships with XFree86) and thus it's not strictly a ports issue. > Do you think sending some polite e-mails to The Right > Person(TM) would help? I'm sure that no-one is deliberately breaking anything, simply that they don't see it as a problem the way they work, so perhaps yes. On this topic in <200007190145.SAA20697@mass.osd.bsdi.com>, Mike Smith said: | We've generally maintained that we should ship whatever the XFree86 | people send us. What's their take on this? Regards, AS --==_Exmh_1715463552P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQE81VfIPHh895bDXeQRAljYAKCMr1PpE48LSoHPP0RineakqMmixwCgnh7T zotrZHcZawet6jH2W6JHsq8= =dRDL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1715463552P-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020505160320.E8A033E14>