Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Thomas Adam
On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:03:55 -0500 (CDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] 1. created a file called .Xdefaults and put in it the one line XTerm*metaSendsEscape: true and then 2. Exited from X and restarted, then run the same test. At this point the Alt key is doing right. You could have

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Thomas Dickey
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Sergey Vlasov wrote: On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Thomas Dickey wrote: There is a control sequence in xterm which can change this mode, but I'd be surprised if mc is using it. Recent libreadline (used by bash) sends this - you can observe it with 'strace -e

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Dominique Michel
Le Sun, 4 May 2008 22:05:34 +0100, Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : On 04/05/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] If you think this problem is cured in 2.4.25, I am glad to try it. But I bet it is not. The problem is as I said one of those weird problems that I But this doesn't have

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Sergey Vlasov
On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Thomas Dickey wrote: There is a control sequence in xterm which can change this mode, but I'd be surprised if mc is using it. Recent libreadline (used by bash) sends this - you can observe it with 'strace -e write bash': write(2, \33[?1034h, 8)

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread kilgota
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Thomas Dickey wrote: On Mon, 5 May 2008, Sergey Vlasov wrote: On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Thomas Dickey wrote: There is a control sequence in xterm which can change this mode, but I'd be surprised if mc is using it. Recent libreadline (used by bash) sends

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Thomas Dickey
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 01:29:58PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 5 May 2008, Thomas Dickey wrote: On Mon, 5 May 2008, Sergey Vlasov wrote: On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Thomas Dickey wrote: There is a control sequence in xterm which can change this mode, but I'd be

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-05 Thread Thomas Dickey
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Thomas Dickey wrote: It was discussed on gnu.bash.bug at the beginning of February 2007. (the same thread's on bug-ncurses). minor correction - most of the thread's in April 2007. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net

FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-04 Thread kilgota
Incidentally, I am not a member of this list, so please reply to or copy to me in answering, thanks. First, as to the mail problem: It obviously arises because I do not use web-based mail and find it abhorrent. Right now, I am logged in via an ssh session from my home computer to my office

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-04 Thread Thomas Adam
On 04/05/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] If you think this problem is cured in 2.4.25, I am glad to try it. But I bet it is not. The problem is as I said one of those weird problems that I But this doesn't have anything to do with FVWM. OK, I am not using Slackware, but neither can I

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-04 Thread Thomas Dickey
On Sun, 4 May 2008, Thomas Adam wrote: On 04/05/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] If you think this problem is cured in 2.4.25, I am glad to try it. But I bet it is not. The problem is as I said one of those weird problems that I But this doesn't have anything to do with FVWM. OK, I am not

Re: FVWM: My previous mail seems not to have bounced, so here is the problem

2008-05-04 Thread kilgota
On Sun, 4 May 2008, Thomas Dickey wrote: On Sun, 4 May 2008, Thomas Adam wrote: On 04/05/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] If you think this problem is cured in 2.4.25, I am glad to try it. But I bet it is not. The problem is as I said one of those weird problems that I But this doesn't