On Wednesday 04 April 2007 09:32:45 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Weren't you talking about portage? In that case you should obviously file > > it against portage.. But yeah, any app that has a --nocolor equivalent > > that doesn't work deserves a bug report.. Even for apps that don't it's > > reasonable to file it as an enhancement request. > > Oh for pete's sake, don't be so literal. Esearch has screwed up. > Emerge has screwed up. Revdep-rebuild has screwed up.
Both portage (that includes emerge) and revdep-rebuild seems to honour NOCOLOR=true if put into /etc/make.conf. It's not really clear to me whether by 'screwed up' you mean the defaults didn't satisfy you or that --nocolor didn't work. If the former I don't really care. > Stop reading the leaves on the trees and paya ttention to the forest. Your > quibbly attitude is exactly the petulant behavior which makes me not want to > waste my time filing bug reports on somebody's pet eye candy. ??? Well, given your attitude I don't really want to encourage you to file any bug reports no matter what happens on your systems. If at some point you decide that you want to achieve something other than incoherent rants and assuming you aren't just whining over the defaults not suiting your precious needs then by all means go ahead and file constructive bugs reports against those apps. `equery belongs` will tell you what packages to file them against. And just so it's clear. I do agree that ideally they should all respect a term setting that shows no color capabilities. But without someone sitting down and writing the code properly I don't see it happening. -- Bo Andresen
pgpVofTBSHFWE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
