Re: Display difference between ncurses version 5.7 and version 6.0.0.20170708

[Rich Burridge]

On 07/18/2017 05:49 PM, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> ...
> fwiw, I just tested with current ncurses on my Debian7 machine,
> and it works as expected, and I compiled ncurses 5.7 to run the
> same test - still works.

Yup. I suspected as much. The fact that we've got two versions
of curses and two sets of terminfo files on Solaris is fraught with
danger.

But I don't think it's using anything from the Solaris supplied files.

>   
> > What needs to be done to get the desired behaviour in this latter case?
> I'd start by checking the terminal description: if you're using anything
> from Solaris itself, that's a problem.  infocmp would show where it's
> read from (and interesting things like "bce" which are likely problems).

I truss'ed both the version 5.7 and 6.0.0.20170708 runs, and they
are both getting their terminal description from

  /usr/gnu/share/terminfo/x/xterm-color

(which is the one from ncurses 6.0.0.20170708; I just used LD_LIBRARY_PATH
to test the Python script with the older ncurses libraries).

Here's what the ncurses version of infocmp says:

address@hidden:/export/home/richb$ /usr/gnu/bin/infocmp xterm-color
#       Reconstructed via infocmp from file: 
/usr/gnu/share/terminfo/x/xterm-color
xterm-color|nxterm|generic color xterm,
        am, km, mir, msgr, xenl,
        colors#8, cols#80, it#8, lines#24, ncv@, pairs#64,
        acsc=``aaffggiijjkkllmmnnooppqqrrssttuuvvwwxxyyzz{{||}}~~,
        bel=^G, bold=\E[1m, clear=\E[H\E[2J, cr=\r,
        csr=\E[%i%p1%d;%p2%dr, cub=\E[%p1%dD, cub1=^H,
        cud=\E[%p1%dB, cud1=\n, cuf=\E[%p1%dC, cuf1=\E[C,
        cup=\E[%i%p1%d;%p2%dH, cuu=\E[%p1%dA, cuu1=\E[A,
        dch=\E[%p1%dP, dch1=\E[P, dl=\E[%p1%dM, dl1=\E[M, ed=\E[J,
        el=\E[K, enacs=\E)0, home=\E[H, ht=^I, hts=\EH, il=\E[%p1%dL,
        il1=\E[L, ind=\n,
        is2=\E[m\E[?7h\E[4l\E>\E7\E[r\E[?1;3;4;6l\E8, kbs=^H,
        kcub1=\EOD, kcud1=\EOB, kcuf1=\EOC, kcuu1=\EOA,
        kdch1=\E[3~, kf1=\E[11~, kf10=\E[21~, kf11=\E[23~,
        kf12=\E[24~, kf13=\E[25~, kf14=\E[26~, kf15=\E[28~,
        kf16=\E[29~, kf17=\E[31~, kf18=\E[32~, kf19=\E[33~,
        kf2=\E[12~, kf20=\E[34~, kf3=\E[13~, kf4=\E[14~,
        kf5=\E[15~, kf6=\E[17~, kf7=\E[18~, kf8=\E[19~, kf9=\E[20~,
        kfnd=\E[1~, kich1=\E[2~, kmous=\E[M, knp=\E[6~, kpp=\E[5~,
        kslt=\E[4~, meml=\El, memu=\Em, op=\E[m, rc=\E8, rev=\E[7m,
        ri=\EM, rmacs=^O, rmcup=\E[2J\E[?47l\E8, rmir=\E[4l,
        rmkx=\E[?1l\E>, rmso=\E[m, rmul=\E[m,
        rs2=\E[m\E[?7h\E[4l\E>\E7\E[r\E[?1;3;4;6l\E8, sc=\E7,
        setab=\E[4%p1%dm, setaf=\E[3%p1%dm, sgr0=\E[m, smacs=^N,
        smcup=\E7\E[?47h, smir=\E[4h, smkx=\E[?1h\E=, smso=\E[7m,
        smul=\E[4m, tbc=\E[3g, u6=\E[%i%d;%dR, u7=\E[6n,
        u8=\E[?1;2c, u9=\E[c,

I'm not sure how to read this. I don't see anything related to "bce".
Any red flags for you with this terminfo file?

A couple more data points:

1/ I see the same behaviour in both gnome-terminal and xterm.
2/ We currently have an older version of vte (0.42.1) in Solaris.
    I googled around and discovered:
    https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=754596
    but neither truss output showed anything related to vte. so that 
might be
    a red herring.

Thanks for looking at this.