X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	Andrew Schulman <schulman DOT andrew AT epa DOT gov>
Subject:	Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: screen, now with 256-color support!
Date:	Tue, 1 Sep 2009 16:29:24 +0000 (UTC)
Lines:	17
Message-ID:	<loom.20090901T182021-340@post.gmane.org>
References:	<announce DOT gaeo95tesfohfdbn4m8snu1afforj074rg AT 4ax DOT com> <416096c60908312242g39e38fe5s5dbe299e84f6afd8 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <loom DOT 20090901T165202-526 AT post DOT gmane DOT org>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

> > TERM=xterm-256color screen -T screen-256color
> 
> Instead of specifying -T screen-256color every time, one can just put
> 'term screen-256color' into .screenrc.  I'll update the docs to show this
> when I make the release current.

Is there any reason that I shouldn't put this command into the default
/etc/screenrc file?  Are there terminal types for which it would cause problems?

I just tried this with a DOS terminal, which doesn't support 256 colors AFAIK. 
It didn't make any difference that I could tell.

Maybe I'll put out another test release with that change, and see if anyone
complains.

A.



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -