On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Chris Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 09:14:14AM EDT, joe M wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Chris Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 01:34:10PM EDT, joe M wrote: > > [..] > >> Hope the above helps. Please let me know if you need more information. > > I'm not an expert in Vim or termcap/terminfo by a long way... :-) > > I'm still not sure you are actually executing the code you compiled, but > I'll trust you on that. If you are confident the executables in /bin and > /usr/bin are the ones you compiled yourself, I nevertheless suggest you > run all your tests invoking them via their full path (/usr/bin/vim and > /bin/vi). > > I also thought that a possible explanation of the inconsistent behavior > might be caused by the fact that ‘vi’ was using termcap and ‘vim’ was > using terminfo.. and that there might be escape sequence discrepancies > between the two on your system --something that I believe should not > happen, since a given terminal's capabilities remain the same and its > termcap and terminfo escape sequences should therefore be identical. > > Another thing: _my understanding_ is that when both terminfo and termcap > are implemented, Vim chooses terminfo ‘automatically’ at configure time. > cf. :help startup-terminal. > > And then there is the fact that I see ‘+terminfo’ in the output of both > the ‘vi --version’ and the ‘vim --version’ that you pasted in your > previous post. (cf. :h +terminfo). > > Besides, ‘man 5 termcap’ has the following: ‘The termcap database is an > obsolete facility for describing the capabilities of character-cell > termi‐ nals and printers. It is retained only for capability with old > programs; new ones should use the ter‐ minfo(5) database and associated > libraries.’ > > Don't see any good reason Vim would use an ‘obsolete facility’ unless it > had to. > > In no particular order, a few additional questions/remarks that might > help clarify: > > 1. What distribution are you running? > > 2. Did you run the default version of vi/vim before you compiled your > own from source? > > 3. If so, are you positive you removed the prior version? > > 4. Not suggesting a workaround, but did you try running the same test on > a different terminal.. & see what happens..? xterm is probably already > installed on your system¹, if not, you could also try good ole rxvt? > > 5. Conversely, how about temporarily removing your compiled version and > installing your distro's default version and running a test. If the > problem goes away, this might suggest that the different behavior is > caused by one of the --enable-option that you specify at ./configure > time..? > > 6. Would it make sense to generate both executables using the same > ./configure options.. check whether you still have the problem? > > 7. Just in case, is there a TERMCAP environment variable exported to > your terminal session before you run vi/vim: > > % env | grep TERMCAP > > 8. As to builtin terminals.. I'm still running vim 7.2 and when I do > a ‘:set term=xxx’ there is no mention of urxvt or rxvt in my list of > builtin terminals. Is this also what happens with vim 7.3? > > 9. Is termcap implemented on your system? On debian I apparently have it > as part of the libncurses5-dev package. > > Naturally, the above are not really meant as questions, but rather, > stuff I would ask myself if I had the same problem and that might help > investigate². > > CJ > > ¹ Note that in the case of xterm, you can {en/dis}able the alternate > screen capability by holding down the CTRL key and middle-clicking: > This brings up a menu where you can check/uncheck ‘Enable alternate > screen switching’. > > ² As to the disappearing lines, (the ‘seq 1000’ test), when I disable > alternate screen switching, I find that roughly one screen worth of > numbers are overwritten by the Vim screen that remains visible after > I exit. I have something like 91 lines on my terminal and when > I scroll back, the last number I see is 909.. immediately followed by > the last visible contents of the Vim session --i.e. if I was looking > at an empty buffer, I see a bash prompt, then vim's tabline, followed > by a number of empty lines and then the status line and lastly my bash > prompt at the bottom of the screen. I would imagine this is expected > behavior (?). > > -- > > WHAT YOU SAY?? > > -- > You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. > Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. > For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Hello CJ, Thanks for the detailed response. I will go through the email and keep you posted if I notice anything different. Again, Thanks a lot for such a detailed response, Joe -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
