Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 19:50:04 +0100 From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> To: Sebastian Gniazdowski <sgniazdowski@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TERM=xterm lacking smcup and rmcup (alternate screen) Message-ID: <20160113185004.GA13013@lorvorc.mips.inka.de> In-Reply-To: <CAKc7PVAELPA3jUR6TfSZjc20ViOCsDHhxAeknN9Fb-GXfWphyw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAKc7PVAELPA3jUR6TfSZjc20ViOCsDHhxAeknN9Fb-GXfWphyw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sebastian Gniazdowski: > I want to criticize an approach taken in FreeBSD regarding the > alternate screen. It's not available in newcons. One person wrote > that's because Tekken doesn't have such feature, and newcons > implements Tekken. > > That's maybe fine. However, newcons doesn't have it's own termcap. It > uses TERM=xterm, which normally has rmcup and smcup. Some smart person te/ti in termcap(5) language. rmcup/smcup is the same in terminfo(5). > thus decided to remove those codes from TERM=xterm. You see what this > leads to? No alternate screen on X11. That's not what happened. The ti/te capabilities for switching to the alternate screen were expressly removed from the "xterm" entry in revision 200503, because a vocal group of developers disliked the alternate screen feature and insisted that it should be disabled in xterm. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/share/termcap/termcap#rev200503 -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160113185004.GA13013>