Bob Proulx wrote:
> A minor problem caused in commit 5c55fb1f.
Oops! Wrong list. Sorry about the noise. Ignore this here. You
will see it there!
Bob
A minor problem caused in commit 5c55fb1f.
autoconf.texi:15401: @kbd expected braces.
autoconf.texi:15401: Misplaced {.
autoconf.texi:15401: Misplaced }.
autoconf.texi:15403: @kbd expected braces.
autoconf.texi:15403: Misplaced {.
autoconf.texi:15403: Misplaced }.
autoconf.texi:15403
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Agreed. Thanks. I've applied the patch below.
Thanks!
> HP-UX 10.20 - - +
> HP-UX 11.23 - - +
This really confused me because I was getting color. So I went back
and looked at things closely and I realized why. Quite some years ago
I "
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> +case $TERM in
> +dumb) exit 77;;
> +esac
> ...
> Thanks! Do we need to guard against other TERM settings, too?
Hmm... I was thinking more along the lines of this patch instead. I
don't think the test should be skipped. I think it should be made
independent of the invo
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Ahh. More head scratching. I'd appreciate if somebody could
> look over these two proposed patches to see if what I think how
> signals ought to work makes sense.
This one I think is the opposite of what it needs to be.
> +trap '' $signal
I think that should be in
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> - with TERM=vt100, on my GNU/Linux system there are still colors
> generated by tput, so I did not use that TERM setting,
That is discouraging. The vt100 does not support color and tput
should not produce escape sequences for it. I believe that would
indicate a bug in
Benoit Sigoure wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> >For example when capturing output with 'script' all of those
> >escape sequences get in the way.
>
> If you do this, it will DWYM unless you have a broken implementation
> of `test -t' (which should
Benoit SIGOURE wrote:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >Of course the step of making color-tests the default could also be
> >done some time later. (Maybe including also a no-color-tests for
> >die-hards.)
I would like a way to force color off. But I can't think of a good
control lever for doing it.
Please CC me since I don't normally read automake-patches. Thanks.
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Does anybody know how to test that colorful output actually happens?
Since the colorful output of check.mk now uses 'tput' and 'tput' uses
TERM, it should be sufficient to force TERM and then test the out
