On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 04:10:30PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> > The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> > output even if stdout is not a terminal.
>
> OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 04:10:30PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> > The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> > output even if stdout is not a terminal.
>
> OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 04:10:30PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> > The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> > output even if stdout is not a terminal.
>
> OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 04:10:30PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> > The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> > output even if stdout is not a terminal.
>
> OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals
On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> output even if stdout is not a terminal.
OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals desired?
> Change the format of the argument
> to the familiar
On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 18:27 -0400, John Brooks wrote:
> The boolean --color argument did not offer the ability to force colourized
> output even if stdout is not a terminal.
OK, but why is colorizing output not to terminals desired?
> Change the format of the argument
> to the familiar
6 matches
Mail list logo
