| 1 |
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:57:28 -0400 Olivier Crete <tester@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| As a gnome-terminal user, I've never had problems with anything that |
| 4 |
| tried to use advanced xterm crap... probably because no uses them. If |
| 5 |
| you want X stuff, just use a real X application (like gvim...). I'm |
| 6 |
| strictly opposed to crippling my terminal use in the most common cases |
| 7 |
| (such a logging into a non-Gentoo system) for one or two legacy |
| 8 |
| applications. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Ok, to put this into perspective: the next major release of vim will |
| 11 |
almost certainly not work on anything that calls itself an xterm unless |
| 12 |
it really is an xterm. You will likely encounter a hard locked terminal |
| 13 |
that you can't unlock. The latest ncurses release will also break |
| 14 |
various things (irssi comes to mind) on Gnome Terminal. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Crippling xterm is no longer considered a suitable workaround. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
| In the era of massive sshing, we have to forget terminfo and new |
| 19 |
| terminal types. We should understand xterm to mean a basic x terminal |
| 20 |
| and not the application from X.org. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Uh, no, a basic x terminal would be TERM=vt100. If an application |
| 23 |
claims TERM=xterm, it is expected to support full xterm capabilities. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) |
| 27 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 28 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives