Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:37:25 +0200 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@netch.kiev.ua> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r200369 - in head: etc share/termcap Message-ID: <20091213083725.GH1260@netch.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <19235.10488.325168.267306@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <200912102225.nBAMPrZx076758@svn.freebsd.org> <ygek4wtgyp4.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <19235.10488.325168.267306@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 00:24:08, wollman wrote about "Re: svn commit: r200369 - in head: etc share/termcap": > > It's great, thank!! > > I believe that our xterm entry was modified not to clear screen when > > applications such as less(1) are terminated. Are there any chance to > > back to the behavior? > > <aol/> > > I don't understand why people put up with the unspeakably obnoxious > "alternate screen" behavior. Please don't tell me someone actually > thinks it's *useful*. I also vote for old variant. If anybody wants to keep previous screen contents, there are many ways for this (another xterm, screen, less, etc.), and all they are more predictable and controllable than alternate screen which isn't loggable and isn't provided by many terminal implementations. -netch-
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091213083725.GH1260>