> You're right, I had not noticed. Disturbing.
>
> On this issue, I have commented out my "color" and "mono" directives for
> "bold" and "underline", which at least gets me bold and underline ANSI
> sequences transcribed as the terminal's bold and underline.
>
> [ Aside: I discovered that I had to comment these out; I couldn't say "colour
> underline underline default" - mutt rejects "underline" as a colour!
> ]
>
> Still, I can see that allowing ANSI through conflicts with mutt's coloured
> markup of boundaries (signatures, attachment markers etc).
>
> What is a sensible approach here?
>
> Cheers,
> Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au>
Well, I was going to start hacking on mutt itself, but I figured an
extremely simple solution is to filter out the "\033[" sequences that mutt
uses to identify the start of an ANSI sequence before creating our own. This
filtering can be done in the highlighting script itself, by adding a new
line at the start:
s/\[/\^\[\[/g
Resulting in:
s/\[/^[[/g
/^[^ ]/{
s/\*\([^*][^*]*\)\*/[1m\1[0m/g
s/\([ ]\)_\([^_][^_]*\)_\([ ]\)/\1[4m\2[0m\3/g
}
--
mwnx
GPG: AEC9 554B 07BD F60D 75A3 AF6A 44E8 E4D4 0312 C726
