mkx" and "tput
rmkx" either only in st or always (which I don't know if it'll break
stuff elsewhere) or bind both kinds of sequences st sends, neither
solution being _great_.
So: Is there a rationale for that decision and would you consider
changing it?
Thanks for your time,
Fabian Homborg
--
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
follows the terminfo specification perfectly.
>
I'll probably try that, thank you.
> The question here is, why do you want to write a shell knowing
> it has bugs and it will not be able of running in all the possible
> (current or future) terminals?
The only term I currently know of that has a problem with fish is st.
Regards,
Fabian Homborg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Greg Reagle writes:
> On 09/02/2015 12:21 PM, Greg Reagle wrote:
>> I've been reading this conversation with interest. I tried different shells
>> with xterm versus st.
>>
>> On 09/02/2015 11:29 AM, Fabian Homborg wrote:
>>> If you launch fish in {
Roberto E. Vargas Caballero writes:
> Hi,
>
>
>> That's not what I'm talking about. Of course a tone of terminals have
>> smkx defined, but fish currently doesn't send it and works on (as far as
>> I know) anything but st.
>>
>> In other words:
>>
>> If you launch fish in { konsole, xterm, gno
