On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 06:34:06AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 12:35:24PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote: > > So is this expected behaviour, e.g. mutt&ncurses have no bright/bold > > attribute? I couldn't find any reference to this problem elsewhere. > > it really depends on how the terminal description is treated by the > ncurses/slang library. slang has some hardcoded behavior to treat > the blink attribute as "bright". you may be seeing that. otherwise, > "bright" may refer to colors 8-15, which (given a correct terminfo), > is treated the same in ncurses and slang. I did replace all brightsomething entries with colorN entries without effect. E.g. color14 and color6 are the same non-bold cyan under ncurses, while they are bold and non-bold under slang. I am using xterm-16color under xterm if that matters. Maybe ncurses and slang have a different interpretation of the terminal capabilities? $ infocmp xterm xterm-16color comparing xterm to xterm-16color. comparing booleans. comparing numbers. colors: 8, 16. ncv: NULL, 32. pairs: 64, 256. comparing strings. kbs: '\177', '^H'. kdch1: '\E[3~', '\177'. setab: '\E[4%p1%dm', '\E[%?%p1%{8}%<%t%p1%'('%+%e%p1%{92}%+%;%dm'. setaf: '\E[3%p1%dm', '\E[%?%p1%{8}%<%t%p1%{30}%+%e%p1%'R'%+%;%dm'. setb: '\E[4%?%p1%{1}%=%t4%e%p1%{3}%=%t6%e%p1%{4}%=%t1%e%p1%{6}%=%t3%e%p1%d%;m', '%p1%{8}%/%{6}%*%{4}%+\E[%d%p1%{8}%m%Pa%?%ga%{1}%=%t4%e%ga%{3}%=%t6%e%ga%{4}%=%t1%e%ga%{6}%=%t3%e%ga%d%;m'. setf: '\E[3%?%p1%{1}%=%t4%e%p1%{3}%=%t6%e%p1%{4}%=%t1%e%p1%{6}%=%t3%e%p1%d%;m', '%p1%{8}%/%{6}%*%{3}%+\E[%d%p1%{8}%m%Pa%?%ga%{1}%=%t4%e%ga%{3}%=%t6%e%ga%{4}%=%t1%e%ga%{6}%=%t3%e%ga%d%;m'. -- Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpJfseVe5Kos.pgp
Description: PGP signature