On 2025-08-10 20:57:26 -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > Then it's a bug in reverseWrap (not related to allowC1Printable).
Yes. I mentioned allowC1Printable because it was needed with my first testcase (with xterm 398-1). > Sure, it's a bug, > > reverseWrap (class ReverseWrap) > Specifies whether or not reverse-wraparound should be enabled. > This corresponds to xterm's private mode 45. The default is > “false”. > > but it doesn't meet the criteria for "severity important": > > important > a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without > rendering it completely unusable to everyone. This is some form of data loss: the whole shell session is lost because of the crash. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Pascaline project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
