Re: rxvt and ion (window resize)

2003-05-30 Thread Christian Reis
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:11:13PM +1000, Geoff Wing wrote:
> Christian Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> :On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 06:34:08PM +1000, Geoff Wing wrote:
> :Sorry, forgot to mention. I downloaded 2.7.10 just to make sure the
> :latest version still has the same bug.
> :
> :You mean this change?
> 
> Yes, I did.  However, I'm not sure whether it will also need a SIGWINCH
> to the process group for some OSs.
> 
> I did install ion, but can't duplicate the effect so whether that's OS
> specific or just that I need to try more times, I don't know yet.  Will
> have to investigate this some more.

I'm on Linux 2.4 here if it's any help. I can reproduce quite easily
simply by splitting the screen vertically in two frames that take up the
whole height of the screen, and opening an rxvt and then a vi inside any
of them. The vi is stuck at 80/24 till I manually perform a resize or
call `resize'. Something like:

.--.  Thanks for your kind attention, I'm
|| |  available for testing any patches or
||VIM  |  minor tweaks to the code.
|| Help Uganda |
||   0,0-1 All |
|| - - - - - - | <- ( 22-char limit )
|| | 
|| |
|| |
|| |
|| |
'--'

Take care,
--
Christian Reis, Senior Engineer, Async Open Source, Brazil.
http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 261 2331 | NMFL


Re: rxvt and ion (window resize)

2003-05-30 Thread Christian Reis
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 06:34:08PM +1000, Geoff Wing wrote:
> :I've for a while now been using ion as my primary window manager
> :(see http://modeemi.cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/ ) together with rxvt.
> :However, for some reason, rxvt fails to set its size correctly when
> :started up in a frame larger than its default. When this happens, the
> :terminal only opens up a small fraction of the screen.

[snip]

> You haven't specified which version of rxvt you're using.  Try v2.7.7
> or later: in src/command.c remove the '#ifdef __CYGWIN32__' and pair
> '#endif' at the start of the main_loop so that the three/four lines there
> are compiled in.  This causes another size ioctl to be sent to the
> shell/program once it's indicated that it's running.

Sorry, forgot to mention. I downloaded 2.7.10 just to make sure the
latest version still has the same bug.

You mean this change?

diff -ur rxvt-2.7.10/src/command.c rxvt-2.7.10-hack/src/command.c
--- rxvt-2.7.10/src/command.c   Wed Mar 26 03:01:23 2003
+++ rxvt-2.7.10-hack/src/command.c  Thu May 22 02:24:19 2003
@@ -3019,12 +3019,10 @@

 h->cmdbuf_ptr = h->cmdbuf_endp = h->cmdbuf_base;

-#if defined(__CYGWIN32__)
 /* once we know the shell is running, send the screen size.  Again!  * */
 (void)rxvt_cmd_getc(r);/* wait for something */
 h->cmdbuf_ptr--;   /* unget it - reprocess it below */
 rxvt_tt_winsize(r->cmd_fd, r->TermWin.ncol, r->TermWin.nrow);
-#endif

 refreshnow = 0;
 for (;;) {

Unfortunately, this does not work for me. The terminal still doesn't
take up the whole space assigned to it. Would you like to get access to
a box with ssh that can demo the issue? It would save the ion install,
though it's such a great WM :-)

> This will probably be made the default situation unless someone can
> think of any reason it would cause problems - this is most likely to be
> caused by someone running a non-shell program in the term.

For now the only workaround I see is calling `resize' right in
my bash_profile. Even then, the width is not set up correctly; the only
way to get that to work is to resize the window temporarily; when this
happens, a correct `size refresh' is triggered and everything works fine
from then on. Tuomo even added a hack to do this `magically' but it
doesn't seem to work in the case of rxvt either.

Take care,
--
Christian Reis, Senior Engineer, Async Open Source, Brazil.
http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 261 2331 | NMFL


Re: Can one read a window title back?

2003-05-30 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
Hi,

From: Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can one read a window title back? 
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 16:44:53 -0400 (EDT)

> If you check src/command.c, you'll see that it's commented out (at least
> in the CVS version).  This was done for security reasons to prevent rogue
> applications from stuffing data into the command line from the title.

http://www.digitaldefense.net/labs/papers/Termulation.txt

It was several months ago that this report was released.  Do anyone
know how major terminal emulators reacted on this report?

---
Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/