On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> First off, I realize that while vim is involved in my problem, it
> may not be the culprit. Still, this mailing list is one of the
> most civilized and helpful I know (can't say that for all of the
> fora for the other involved software), so I'll start here.

No, it's not the culprit; it's behaving exactly as expected with the
information it's given.

> Here's my problem. I like >8-color schemes. Unfortunately, my
> terminal of choice (urxvt) only supports 88 colors (t_Co=88).
> Thus, most colorschemes revert to their 8-color behaviour or
> simply do nothing, neither of which is what I want.

You might like my CSApprox plugin, check it out:
http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=2390

> The most excellent colorscheme "desert256" is both to my liking
> and works well in plain urxvt. It's when screen is involved that
> things go south. Screen tells vim that t_Co is 8 which is not
> only wrong, but also ugly. If I tell vim by hand that t_Co is 88,
> things become trippy but not beautiful. With t_Co=256 it looks
> almost like the default case without screen (close enough for me,
> anyway).

screen doesn't "tell" vim that t_Co is 8, screen tells vim that the
terminal type is "screen" and vim looks that up and figures out that
the "screen" terminal supports 8 colors.  The way to fix this is to
configure screen to advertise the terminal type more accurately by
putting something like

term screen-256color-bce

in your ~/.screenrc.  You might need to install this terminfo entry -
on Debian/Ubuntu, you can do that by installing the ncurses-term
package, other distros will vary.  If nothing else, you can look up
how to decompile the terminfo entry on a system that has it, copy the
plain text version to the system that doesn't have it, and recompile
it there.

> I have prepared several screenshots to illustrate what happens:
>
> http://eric.schwarzvogel.de/~klausman/screen_and_vim/
>
> The names should be self-explanatory.
>
> What I'd like to have is the look of urxvt_vim_t_Co_88.png in the
> default case of screen (i.e. instead of
> urxvt_screen_vim_t_Co_8.png)
>
> So what I wonder about is this:
>
> - Whose fault is this?
> - How do I fix it?

Hope that helps, but if you need more help feel free to ask.

~Matt

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to