12:58 p.m.
Mike doesn't seem to be paying attention to this somewhat dated
thread but in case anyone else is noticing.... it seems the erase
setting is different than previous xterms. I get
erase = ^?
looking at stty -a output.
I think this means that the backspace key in emacs -nw will not
function as expected (without some elisp correction) but will call
`help' instead.
Very disconcerting when coding at full speed.
One can set erase to ^H in .bash_profile or similar but then there is
the need to keep up with that setting when changing users or etc.
I'm guessing the old defualt was `erase = ^H' but not really sure. I
don't see any settings in my rc files so apparently it didn't need any
setting before.
1:09 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
Mike doesn't seem to be paying attention to this somewhat dated
thread but in case anyone else is noticing.... it seems the erase
setting is different than previous xterms. I get
erase = ^?
looking at stty -a output.
I think this means that the backspace key in emacs -nw will not
function as expected (without some elisp correction) but will call
`help' instead.
Very disconcerting when coding at full speed.
One can set erase to ^H in .bash_profile or similar but then there is
the need to keep up with that setting when changing users or etc.
I'm guessing the old defualt was `erase = ^H' but not really sure. I
don't see any settings in my rc files so apparently it didn't need any
setting before.
Actually this affects other tools as well (not just emacs). For eg: in
'less filename' with '/' for search - I can't use the backspace key.
/fdsafa^H^H^H^H
However doing 'stty -a' gives the same values on both the old and new
xterms. (so the old setting is still erase = ^?)
Satish
1:34 p.m.
Satish Balay <balay(a)fastmail.fm> writes:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Mike doesn't seem to be paying attention to this somewhat dated
> thread but in case anyone else is noticing.... it seems the erase
> setting is different than previous xterms. I get
> erase = ^?
> looking at stty -a output.
>
> I think this means that the backspace key in emacs -nw will not
> function as expected (without some elisp correction) but will call
> `help' instead.
>
> Very disconcerting when coding at full speed.
>
> One can set erase to ^H in .bash_profile or similar but then there is
> the need to keep up with that setting when changing users or etc.
>
> I'm guessing the old defualt was `erase = ^H' but not really sure. I
> don't see any settings in my rc files so apparently it didn't need any
> setting before.
Actually this affects other tools as well (not just emacs). For eg: in
'less filename' with '/' for search - I can't use the backspace key.
/fdsafa^H^H^H^H
However doing 'stty -a' gives the same values on both the old and new
xterms. (so the old setting is still erase = ^?)
Maybe my `old' was older than your `old' hehe.
I was using 179 before updateing to.
I haven't had to piddle around with the erase setting for a very long
time, but now with new xterm I get the behavior described, in emacs -nw.
I see what you mean about `less'. That has changed too. So this
must be another setting... maybe the `-/+ ie' (initiate erase)
1:46 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
Satish Balay <balay(a)fastmail.fm> writes:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
>> Mike doesn't seem to be paying attention to this somewhat dated
>> thread but in case anyone else is noticing.... it seems the erase
>> setting is different than previous xterms. I get
>> erase = ^?
>> looking at stty -a output.
>>
>> I think this means that the backspace key in emacs -nw will not
>> function as expected (without some elisp correction) but will call
>> `help' instead.
>>
>> Very disconcerting when coding at full speed.
>>
>> One can set erase to ^H in .bash_profile or similar but then there is
>> the need to keep up with that setting when changing users or etc.
>>
>> I'm guessing the old defualt was `erase = ^H' but not really sure. I
>> don't see any settings in my rc files so apparently it didn't need any
>> setting before.
>
> Actually this affects other tools as well (not just emacs). For eg: in
> 'less filename' with '/' for search - I can't use the backspace
key.
>
> /fdsafa^H^H^H^H
>
> However doing 'stty -a' gives the same values on both the old and new
> xterms. (so the old setting is still erase = ^?)
Maybe my `old' was older than your `old' hehe.
I was using 179 before updateing to.
Just to be sure - I noted the version of the old xterm - 179-5 (FC1)
I haven't had to piddle around with the erase setting for a very long
time, but now with new xterm I get the behavior described, in emacs -nw.
I see what you mean about `less'. That has changed too. So this
must be another setting... maybe the `-/+ ie' (initiate erase)
I did a diff of all the settings (from 'stty -a > log' ) and they
were the same (except for the screen size of the 2 xterms)
Satish
1:52 p.m.
Satish Balay <balay(a)fastmail.fm> writes:
Just to be sure - I noted the version of the old xterm - 179-5 (FC1)
>
> I haven't had to piddle around with the erase setting for a very long
> time, but now with new xterm I get the behavior described, in emacs -nw.
>
> I see what you mean about `less'. That has changed too. So this
> must be another setting... maybe the `-/+ ie' (initiate erase)
I did a diff of all the settings (from 'stty -a > log' ) and they
were the same (except for the screen size of the 2 xterms)
Ok, so much for that theory... what do you suppose explains the fact
that the backspc key now acts differently?
I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective behavior in emacs or
less prior to this change.
2:02 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
Satish Balay <balay(a)fastmail.fm> writes:
> Just to be sure - I noted the version of the old xterm - 179-5 (FC1)
>
>>
>> I haven't had to piddle around with the erase setting for a very long
>> time, but now with new xterm I get the behavior described, in emacs -nw.
>>
>> I see what you mean about `less'. That has changed too. So this
>> must be another setting... maybe the `-/+ ie' (initiate erase)
>
> I did a diff of all the settings (from 'stty -a > log' ) and they
> were the same (except for the screen size of the 2 xterms)
Ok, so much for that theory... what do you suppose explains the fact
that the backspc key now acts differently?
don't know
I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective behavior in emacs or
less prior to this change.
If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then yes
- I can reproduce this.
I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
Satish
2:23 p.m.
OOPS - please disregard last message - hit Send by mistake.
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 14:02 -0500, Satish Balay wrote:
...
If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then yes
- I can reproduce this.
I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
There's definitely something going on here besides stty. Did the
comparison of stty -a for KDE konsole and xterm 191 and they are the
same except for the size and ixon (XON/XOFF) settings. Both have "erase
= ^?" yet the xterm has the problems described earlier for emacs -nw and
less while both work as expected in konsole. Can also reproduce the
old/desirable behavior with xterm-179-6.EL on another box.
Phil
3:40 p.m.
Satish Balay <balay(a)fastmail.fm> writes:
> I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective behavior
in emacs or
> less prior to this change.
If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then yes
- I can reproduce this.
I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
Maybe Mike will wake up and tell us what he changed ... : )
Anyone else notice the `visual bell' flash is much more pronounced?
8:04 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective
behavior in emacs or
>> less prior to this change.
>
> If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then yes
> - I can reproduce this.
>
> I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
> version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
> an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
Maybe Mike will wake up and tell us what he changed ... : )
No problem. ;o)
Red Hat previously applied a custom patch to the xterm resources
file that ships with xterm. Every change that Red Hat has ever
made to the xterm resources does two things:
1) It fixes some problem or improves xterm in some way for
certain users.
2) It changes xterm from the upstream default, and causes
behaviour differences for people who expect the xterm default
behaviour. Some of the changes make life very easy for the
average PC using xterm user, but make things more difficult for
the average old school UNIX user, using a highly heterogenous
UNIX environment, with Red Hat OS's connecting to non-Linux OS's,
using software such as Hummingbird Exceed, etc.
In general, almost every possible "bug fix" for xterm, fixes one
users problem and creates a problem for another user. In other
words, it is generally impossible to make xterm work by default
for everyone out there in every situation. Different users
simply require different application defaults, and there is an
extremely large number of users out there with very different
expectations for how things should work out of the box.
That means it is basically impossible to make everyone happy, yet
we still need to have a "default". Our defaults are generally
chosen so that things work best for the largest group of users
out there, however that is still a complicated problem to choose
defaults for.
The closer we stick to upstream xterm resources, the better, as
any problems encountered by people are generic xterm issues.
However, there are certain things that xterm defaults to, which
are extremely inconvenient for the userbase using our operating
system. One example of this, is that the average person using an
IBM PC or similar computer, or using some other architecture
with a PC keyboard, is used to the "backspace" key deleting the
character to the left of the cursor, and the "DEL" key deleting
the character under the cursor. That is traditional PC keyboard
behaviour, and what the overwhelming majority of all computer
users expect to happen. It is for this reason, that this is our
intentional desired default handling of both of these keys.
Old school UNIX people however, may very well be used to UNIX
terminals or other keyboards which the meaning of these keys is
somewhat different.
It's essentially impossible to have a single default work for
both groups of people, and it is a heavily debated topic out
there. The important thing is to _have_ a default, and generally
speaking, default configurations for computer software should
really reflect what the largest group of users of the software
expect to be the common behaviour. Since the xterm defaults do
not reflect the behaviour of what the majority of users expect,
we have to customize the default xterm configuration to make
things work like most users expect. The side effect of this, is
that users prefering traditional UNIX behaviour, or using
software such as Exceed, may need to customize their xterm
resources manually to get a configuration that works within their
environment.
Over time, we've gained a number of such divergences from the
upstream xterm resources. The xterm 191-1 package no longer has
any Red Hat customizations - it is stock xterm with no resource
modifications. So anything that is now "broken" in the eyes of a
user, is "broken" so to speak in the default upstream xterm -
where "broken" is of course entirely within the eyes of the
beholder, and will vary from person to person.
The purpose of the exercise, was to see just what default xterm
resources people consider "broken", and to re-enable the Red Hat
customizations for those issues where deemed necessary. If any
of our customizations aren't missed, we can possibly drop them,
and the closer we are to upstream xterm, the less maintenance
overhead there is, as well as the less problems the upstream
maintainer of xterm will see from Red Hat OS users
(theoretically).
So far the experiment has went well, and I've got a list of
things that I plan on re-enabling soon.
Thanks again to everyone who has tested xterm and posted back to
the list their experience and feedback!
7:10 p.m.
"Mike A. Harris" <mharris(a)www.linux.org.uk> writes:
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
>>> I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective behavior in emacs
or
>>> less prior to this change.
>>
>> If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then yes
>> - I can reproduce this.
>>
>> I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
>> version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
>> an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
>
>Maybe Mike will wake up and tell us what he changed ... : )
No problem. ;o)
OK so what specifically was changed that causes the `new' behavior of
of backspc NOT deleting to the left in emacs -nw. Ditto for the
change that causes to appear when using backspace in `less' search
fields?
4:40 a.m.
On Sun, 4 Jul 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 19:10:46 -0500
From: Harry Putnam <reader(a)newsguy.com>
To: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Reply-To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
<fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com>
X-BeenThere: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: Re: new xterm and erase setting
"Mike A. Harris" <mharris(a)www.linux.org.uk> writes:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
>>>> I'v very certain I wasn't getting the respective behavior in
emacs or
>>>> less prior to this change.
>>>
>>> If you mean the 'backspace' key worked with the old version - then
yes
>>> - I can reproduce this.
>>>
>>> I have some xterms which I didn't kill after installing the new
>>> version - so I'm able to comapre (old and new behavior). I also have
>>> an FC2 box - with 179-6.EL - where I can reproduce the old behavior.
>>
>>Maybe Mike will wake up and tell us what he changed ... : )
>
> No problem. ;o)
OK so what specifically was changed that causes the `new' behavior of
of backspc NOT deleting to the left in emacs -nw. Ditto for the
change that causes to appear when using backspace in `less' search
fields?
Along with all other Red Hat customizations, the one that fixes
this problem was removed. I don't know off hand without
examining the patch we applied, which of the customizations fixed
this, but it wouldn't be hard to find out.
Thomas will be putting xterm-192 out soon, and I'll probably
update to it right away, again without our patch applied, just to
see which upstream changes he's made will work for people instead
of our customizing things. Once that's in the tree and I get a
bit of feedback, I'll probably re-integrate our patch and remove
any changes that aren't needed.
The backspace/delete problem will likely go away then also. I'll
post a note here for testing/feedback then also.
Thanks again to everyone for fiddling with the new xterm and
discussing it here.
TTYL
2:12 p.m.
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 13:46 -0500, Satish Balay wrote:
> I see what you mean about `less'. That has changed too. So
this
> must be another setting... maybe the `-/+ ie' (initiate erase)
I did a diff of all the settings (from 'stty -a > log' ) and they
were the same (except for the screen size of the 2 xterms)
7:47 p.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Harry Putnam wrote:
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 12:58:56 -0500
From: Harry Putnam <reader(a)newsguy.com>
To: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Reply-To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
<fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com>
X-BeenThere: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
Subject: new xterm and erase setting
Mike doesn't seem to be paying attention to this somewhat dated
thread but in case anyone else is noticing.... it seems the erase
setting is different than previous xterms. I get
erase = ^?
looking at stty -a output.
I'm paying attention. I'm keeping track of everyone's feedback
to get a grasp of what all changes I need to make, so I can make
them all in one shot.
I think this means that the backspace key in emacs -nw will not
function as expected (without some elisp correction) but will call
`help' instead.
Very disconcerting when coding at full speed.
One can set erase to ^H in .bash_profile or similar but then there is
the need to keep up with that setting when changing users or etc.
I'm guessing the old defualt was `erase = ^H' but not really sure. I
don't see any settings in my rc files so apparently it didn't need any
setting before.
Keep posting problems you discover, and rest assured that I'm
watching. ;o) I'll update xterm sometime in the next 2 weeks or
so with various changes to restore things that seem to be the
most important to people. I'll post an email here at that time
to indicate what changes I've made also, and to get everyone to
test the new build and report back.
Thanks again to everyone for testing and discussing things on the
list. Much appreciated.
TTYL
7296
days inactive
7301
days old
12 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Harry Putnam -
Mike A. Harris -
Phil Schaffner -
Satish Balay