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