On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 01:24:00PM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote: > It appears screen-256color converts colours 8-15 into 90-97 which are an > extension designed to allow bright colours without the bold attribute (bold > font).
Looking at xterm's ctlseqs.pdf, it refers to these 90-97 and 100-107 codes as "aixterm" codes; I suppose before xterm invented the 88- and 256-color hack, IBM had their own ideas about how to extend ECMA48 beyond 8 colours. > Looking briefly at xterm-256color in terminfo.src I can't see why it > doesn't do the same but I don't have time or inclination to dig into > it right now. There's a family of screen terminfo entries, and a family of xterm terminfo entries; if screen-256color inherits from screen-16color but xterm-256color overrides setab and setaf entirely, that might explain it. I'm not sure how to go about checking that, though, and as you say, it hardly matters. > This appears to be yet another terminal capability without a terminfo > flag allowing it to be detected so tmux can't make use of it > explicitly (ie pass it through if it is supported). However, > converting it into colours 8-15 (which should then be converted into > 3x+bold for non-256-colour terminals) should hopefully do the trick. I applied your patch to the Debian source, rebuilt the package and installed it, and my color-test script works fine now as does my mutt configuration. Thank you very much! Tim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
