>The xterm terminfo entry does not currently advertise the smm
>capability, if I am reading "infocmp xterm" output correctly.
That's referring to the Debian packages for ncurses and xterm.
xterm (upstream) has had smm/rmm in the terminfo description
since patch #216 (2006/8/1).
I've made occasio
Your message dated Mon, 5 Dec 2011 04:32:54 -0600
with message-id <20111205103254.ga9...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net>
and subject line Re: please decide how terminals should report Alt+letter
combinations
has caused the Debian Bug report #651035,
regarding please decide how terminals should report Al
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> I guess I wasn't clear. The proposal had two parts:
> 1) standardizing on a default sequence to send for Alt+letter combinations
> 2) documenting in policy that advertising the smm capability is a Bad Idea.
> The first part seems to be what you have been responding
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Note that I'm not arguing against changing things in xterm, particularly
> in conjunction with upstream. Just that I'm not sure it's worth writing a
> policy about this, rather than making decisions specifically about the
> xterm package to make it work better, better serve
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Basically, I'm dubious the gain from this is worth the effort. Presumably
>> Thomas has some reason for making xterm's default what it is currently, if
>> only "it's always been that way."
> The xterm terminfo entry does not currently advertise t
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> 1. Applications should all behave the same way wrt handling of the
>> Meta key in terminals. Advertising the smm capability makes that
>> basically impossible.
>
> Basically, I'm dubious the gain from this is worth the effort. Presumably
Russ Allbery writes:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> My initial reaction is that I want to see a more compelling justification
>>> for standardizing anything here.
>> I don't think it's any more or less confusing than delete-versus-
>> backspace behavior.
> I do, for the s
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> My initial reaction is that I want to see a more compelling justification
>> for standardizing anything here.
> I don't think it's any more or less confusing than delete-versus-
> backspace behavior.
I do, for the simple reason that everyone uses
Russ Allbery wrote:
> My initial reaction is that I want to see a more compelling justification
> for standardizing anything here.
I don't think it's any more or less confusing than delete-versus-
backspace behavior. For an example of what went wrong in the past
that prompted me to suggest addin
My initial reaction is that I want to see a more compelling justification
for standardizing anything here. We've gone years with this behavior
without standardizing anything. Are there multiple other bug reports from
users for which this is confusing? Is it worth the effort for all
maintainers o
10 matches
Mail list logo
