From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 11 21:46:31 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8085106568B for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:46:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 082E58FC08 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 94040 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2009 21:46:29 -0000 Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33) by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 11 Nov 2009 21:46:29 -0000 Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:46:29 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <20091111.224629.71094278.sthaug@nethelp.no> To: des@des.no From: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: <86639goiet.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <86fx8kolak.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20091111.215617.74746990.sthaug@nethelp.no> <86639goiet.fsf@ds4.des.no> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mel.flynn+fbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net, ed@80386.nl, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Final call for testers: TERM=xterm X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:46:31 -0000 > > That may be so. However, I (like others on this list) hate that feature > > and its default usage in Linux with a passion. > > I don't understand why you are blaming Linux for this. It's an xterm > feature that probably goes back twenty years or more (xterm turned 25 a > few months ago). We're not talking just xterm, either; searching for > "ti=" in /etc/termcap reveals that it was available on dozens of > terminals, including several IBM and TekTronix models, just to drop a > couple of big names. Oh, I'm not blaming Linux. I have edited my fair share of termcap files, even going back to SunOS and early X11, just to get rid of this (in my view) extremely annoying feature. > Modern Unix was built on the "mechanism, not policy" principle, and > there is no reason why we should make an exception in this particular > instance. If our termcap hadn't been intentionally sabotaged, those who > hate this feature (as I used to) could easily turn it off, but as things > stand, those who like it (as I do now) can't easily turn it back on, > especially if they work in mixed environments. You can have your own private termcap/terminfo file, so it is possible to use the feature if you want to. "mechanism, not policy" is fine, but there is also a need to choose sensible defaults. In this case I like the FreeBSD default better than the Linux default. If the FreeBSD default changes, I'll learn to live with that. I think we'll have to agree t disagree. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no