[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#83063: PROPOSED] enhanced x-terminal-emulator policy



On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:43:12AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > I think this change should say something about full screen support.
 
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 09:43:39AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Full screen support?  What does that mean?  Maximizable to the size of the
> root window?  Works well with the "screen" program?

9term does not have an addressable cursor.

> > Otherwise, if 9term were modified such that -T is equivalent to -label,
> > it would get the highest priority -- but it emulates a printer.
> 
> What are you talking about?  "The highest priority"?  You've evaluated all
> terminal emulators in Debian already?  9term supports ISO 10646 combining
> characters at implementation level 3?

Sorry -- I made the assumption that 9term's unicode support is good as it
gets for the current stock of debian terminal emulators.  You're right:
this assumption could easily be false.

> If 9term emulates a printer, why is it called a terminal emulator?

More properly, it emulates a terminal where TERM=dumb gains you access
to all of its features.  ex works fine, but vi is rather silly.

-- 
Raul



Reply to: