From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EDPld-0000fh-3m for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:00:53 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j88GuOgv007466; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:56:24 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j88GsCl5005438 for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:54:12 GMT Received: from 82-41-57-20.cable.ubr08.edin.blueyonder.co.uk ([82.41.57.20] helo=snowdrop.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EDPij-0002K7-DT for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:57:53 +0000 Received: from localhost.home ([127.0.0.1] helo=snowdrop.home) by snowdrop.home with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EDPk9-0004j0-7M for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:59:21 +0100 Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 17:59:17 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Fixing the TERM mess Message-ID: <20050908175917.05c3ddbe@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20050908165010.GD14257@larva.oko> References: <20050829155303.4420371b@snowdrop.home> <20050908165010.GD14257@larva.oko> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.13 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Signature_Thu__8_Sep_2005_17_59_17_+0100__oKExC4D+IvShHU7; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: f4f4ed53-33cf-40cf-8251-e2e58baa39a2 X-Archives-Hash: a30101d03267429e11d656d967ae36e9 --Signature_Thu__8_Sep_2005_17_59_17_+0100__oKExC4D+IvShHU7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 18:50:10 +0200 ivan wrote: | > | That'd also solve the cases where a terminal changes right | > | beneath a running application. That | > | happens during attaching a screen session. | >=20 | > No it doesn't. Screen provides a virtual terminal with lots and | > lots of capabilities. It then reduces them itself internally to | > what it thinks the underlying term supports -- again, this is done | > via terminfo, so if you're running screen on xterm you're running a | > crippled screen. |=20 | So, screen advertises the same capabilities to the starting apps | regardless the terminal the screen is being run on? Yes. | Or it advertises reduced capabilities according the terminal it's | currently attached to? No. | As for the former, I don't think that would work. If an app chooses a | multi color style cuz screen is able to handle it, but then screen | tries to reduce it to mono. That's exactly what happens. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature_Thu__8_Sep_2005_17_59_17_+0100__oKExC4D+IvShHU7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDIG3o96zL6DUtXhERAo+2AJ9HD4p6qJ/PgP6KNlgLMrRSpsSxFgCdGTAe JE5HvEYnW7QAYlLh1oT2py8= =FHJm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature_Thu__8_Sep_2005_17_59_17_+0100__oKExC4D+IvShHU7-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list