On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 02:55:54PM -0430, Andres Perera wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Nezmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sent this to Andres, forwarding... > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Nezmer <[email protected]> ----- > > > > Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:34:15 +0300 > > From: Nezmer <[email protected]> > > To: Andres Perera <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [pacman-dev] [PATCH 1/3] makepkg: fallback to legacy termcap > > capabilities > > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) > > > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:47:02PM -0430, Andres Perera wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Nezmer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > If you're running FreeBSD. The default $TERM in ttyv<int> is cons25(1) > >> > and > >> > it can handle the colours just fine. So I don't know how the hard-coded > >> > list is relevant. > >> > > >> > (1) I heard this vintage default will change soon. > >> > >> There's really no stopping at that point; the default terminal in OpenBSD > >> is > >> "vt220" and it can handle colors, so can Linux's "linux" terminal. > >> > >> So it's screwing some terminals up vs. replicating ncurses in Bash -- since > >> that's exactly what ncurses does, it looks at the TERM string and compares > >> it > >> to a list. Once this "vintage" changes, I guess makepkg is supposed to be > >> updated, if the second option is any good. > >> > >> Are you proposing that it should check for all these terminals or just > >> grant > >> these bonuses to those who link against terminfo? > > > > First of all, Don't assume I know what I'm talking about. If I say > > something stupid, please correct me. > > I'm not following. > > > > > Currently, makepkg with colours work just fine in FreeBSD's default > > cons25 term. The patch will assume cons25 can't handle colours and will > > disable them, right? > > > > So, from a user prospective. This does not improve the experience in > > FreeBSD. > > > > Feel free to shout at my stupidity. > > > > * PS: xterm is the new default in 9-CURRENT. Hopefully It will make it > > to STABLE soon If It didn't already. > > I think you're somewhat misled by the fact that freebsd was named in the > commit > message. > > The reason I'm only replicating terms found in tmux's [1] and tcshrc's > [2] lists is because considering only X-based terminals narrows down the > list to a point where it's manageable. > > Yes, we both know that it doesn't check for cons25. What I'm getting at > is, would you or anybody be willing to maintain a list that includes it, > in addition to vt220, linux, whatever OS xyz uses? I'm not implying > that's bad or stupid, I just personally have no interest in doing that. > > If this is not a common ground then I guess you suggest that assuming is > a ok? > > 1: > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/tmux/tty.c?rev=1.91;content-type=text%2Fplain > 2: > http://tcshrc.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/tcshrc/tcshrc/src/tcshrc.set?revision=1.9&view=markup > > If you check out both examples, the first thing that comes to mind is > that they're not querying for the purpose of using color escapes. But hc > (has_status) is present in a great deal of termcap entries, and the sole > reason it's not being checked through an ncurses function is because > modern terminal emulators don't bother advertising has_status. > > This relates because setaf isn't accesible through termcap.
Let me ask a simple question: Is there a real-life example where this patch would be beneficial to me as user? Is there someone who would like to run the next version of pacman on a 10 or 15 year old term definition? cons25 is probably the worst $TERM that is actually used nowadays and It can handle colour escapes. I remember an Arch developer missing makepkg colours in his chroots with the latest pacman release. Failing back to colour escapes fixed that too. Is there a $TERM that can't handle colour escapes and It is actually used?
