On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 02:15:13AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > > I think it's a pretty dirty hack.
<chuckle> yeah, but it's not the _only_ 'is_an_xterm' type function relying on WINDOWID.... ;-) > WINDOWID doesn't mean that you are running xterm. ....as you see, I express some doubts in the comment.... > It may be another terminal emulator. Absolutely -- IIRC, konsole _doesn't_ use WINDOWID, but I'll bet some of 'em do (I think they *all* _should_, actually...) Well, maybe one could test, what.... Eterm? rxvt? There's three possibilities, I guess: Something bad happens under rxvt or what-have-you with define_sequences (xterm_key_defines); (Already known perhaps?) Nothing in particular happens. Or --- perhaps --- it actually gets C-PGDN/UP working with screen-under-rxvt-or-whatever TOO! ;-) > > It would be much better if screen just emulated xterm and used TERM=xterm. Nah, screen is locked into vt100-ishness AFAICT... What happens if you use TERM=xterm-*anything* with screen (*even if* the terminfo db is simply the actual screen db *named* to xterm-anything....) is, that the screen painting with mc's Ctrl-O feature gets fouled up.... (the subshell works, but the screen is blank -- you have to hit enter to get the prompt back. This is even _with_ 'set altscreen on'). That's probably because screen's using strncmp( , "xterm", 5 ) _too_.... > I don't know, maybe it's supported already. Well, one could write a patch for _screen_ I guess.... ;-) Here's the thing: even if it is only screen-under-xterm that this patch helps, it's worth doing _somehow_ if it can be done -- If the _only_ thing standing between screen's being able to use this (important) bit of functionality is the _string_ "xterm" (and AFAICS that's the case) then surely something other than, or in addition to strncmp() should be used.... In other words, if a screen_under_xterm function _can_ be produced, it should be. AFAICT this works _perfectly_ with xterm, and that's not insignificant -- a lot of people use xterm, after all. ;-) There's gotta be a way to test for running-under-xterm-when-TERM= something else (doesn't there? ;-).... Maybe someone who knows more about this kind of coding (I generally run to shellscripts and editor macros....) could come up with something.... I mentioned XGetCommand -- I don't know how easy it is to get at the info, but WM_COMMAND will always contain the command and arguments used to invoke a terminal.... I certainly agree that if the function breaks something, or risks breaking something, it needs to be extended -- but I think such a function should _exist_. Heck, if worst came to worst, one could just extend the function with a few strncmp(termvalues,,) i.e. NOT eterm, NOT rxvt.... whatever it takes. I certainly think it's worth doing! Thanks for your reply! best, Sean _______________________________________________ Mc-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
