Thanks, Alejandro and Hannu, for your additional responses.
I am again getting closer, but still not there. Please bear with me.
At the time, I did not quite understand this part from Alejandro:
A> OK. In my experience, you can set the fg/bg colors the way you want
A> by modifying the system settings in the shortcut (right-click on
A> window bar and modify properties there), or by using *bold colors* in
A> your definitions. For some reason, in the win32 console \e[00;30m is
A> grey and \e[01;30m is white.
Now that I know what these escape sequences mean (thanks to the
document which Alejandro posted and [1]), I understand that part better.
However, *whatever* I do, I can never get the text/foreground color
white. 37 should do that, but it gives me light-grey instead
(192/192/192 in "Selected Color Values" of Properties).
Also Alejandro's escape sequences do not work for me. \e[00;30m gives
me black text on a white background (i.e. no change) and \e[01;30m gives
me light-grey text on a white background. 01 is Bold, so according to
Alejandro that should give me white (text), but it gives me light-grey.
The best I get sofar is:
\cygwin\bin\echo -en '\033[37;40mThis is a text.\033[30;0m'
Which gives me light-grey (instead of the desired white) text on a
black (as desired) background.
I still did not understand why the old (tin) executable on the old
Cygwin B20 release could give white on black, because it seems to be a
pure Win32 console issue.
B20 apparently used /etc/termcap instead of terminfo (there is no
terminfo directory), but also the B20 /etc/termcap ("cygwin" = "linux")
escape sequences for rev/mr, smso/so and rmso/se give light-grey on
dark-grey (instead of white on black). Those escape sequences were
mr=\E[7m:so=\E[7m:se=\E[m
However *those* (\E[7m and se=\E[m) escape sequences *do* bring me
closer:
If I use *those* (\E[7m and se=\E[m) escape sequences with *B20*'s
echo(1) command, I *do* get white (desired) text on black (desired)
background, while with the *new* (1.5.9) echo(1) command, I get
light-grey (undesired) on dark-grey (undesired).
I.e. in short: With B20 versus 1.5.9 echo(1) commands, I see the
*exact same* behaviour as I see with the B20 versus 1.5.9 tin
executables!
So it seems that this is not a terminfo problem, but another type of
Cygwin problem and that even something as simple as echo(1) is somehow
'terminal/color aware [2]!
Anyone any idea *where* those (echo(1) et al related) color settings
can be set? I.e. what makes 1.5.9's echo(1) command display a
white-on-black escape sequence as lightgrey-on-black or lightgrey-on-
darkgrey?
[1] Linux Magazine September 2003 POWER TOOLS Escape Sequences Useful
Text that You Can't See:
http://www.linux-mag.com/downloads/2003-09/power/escape_sequences.html
[2] For some reason *DOS* echo, type and "copy ... con" commands
*display* [3] the escape characters instead of executing them, so I had
to use echo(1). If someone knows a way to let *DOS* commands execute
escape sequences insteas of displaying them, then please let me know.
[3] Where the escape character is displayed as a (1-character)
back-arrow character.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
