Attached is the patch I mentioned below that I'm using, in case it's of value to anyone or clarifies the problem a bit.
On 19 August 2012 03:11, Tom Ryder <t...@sanctum.geek.nz> wrote: > Hi tmux devs; > > Revision r2749 (sync OpenBSD patchset 1070) by tcunha includes some code > implementing SCL 5 mode and DECCRA transformations for xterms that report > versions over 270. This is working as expected in my xterm version 278. The > code determines the xterm version by reading it from the control sequence > [>1;278;0c. > > However, VTE (the GTK terminal widget on which xfce4-terminal and > gnome-terminal among others are based) does not seem to follow this behavior, > instead substituting a transformation of its own major and minor version > number > in the function vte_sequence_handler_send_secondary_device_attributes(): > > <http://gitorious.org/community-ssu/vte/blobs/master/src/vteseq.c#line3040> > > The most recent version of this library as packaged for Debian Sid, by way of > example, returns the version number 2802; from tmux-server.log with tmux > -vvvvv > and xfce4-terminal: > > keys are 12 (^[[>1;2802;0c) > received xterm version 2802 > > However, despite thereby passing the >270 version comparison test, VTE does > not > seem to implement the DECCRA codes that tmux expects as of this revision, > and as a result its behaviour when redrawing smaller rectangles on the screen > is > wrong, failing to redraw the appropriate sections correctly and/or > spitting DECCRA > control codes into the terminal. > > One way to reproduce this is to open a vertical split in a new tmux session in > xfce4-terminal, and in the leftmost pane to cut lines from a vim buffer about > 3 or 4 lines above the bottom of the pane. This works as expected in an xterm > but fails in VTE based terminals and appears to happen independently of $TERM > settings. > > An easy temporary fix (and what I'm doing from this point) is to rewrite all > the version tests in revision r2749 to fail, after which everything > works properly > again in all terminals I've tried. > > Is this perhaps something that should be taken up with the VTE devs, or could > there be some other sensible workaround? This is my first submission to the > list, so apologies if I've not followed an appropriate procedure. I'm > a big fan of > tmux and I love the work you guys do. > > -- Tom Ryder @ Sanctum
r2749-noop.patch
Description: Binary data
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________ tmux-users mailing list tmux-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tmux-users
