Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Love it! ... have problems! #9

Open
regcl opened this issue May 23, 2013 · 6 comments
Open

Love it! ... have problems! #9

regcl opened this issue May 23, 2013 · 6 comments

Comments

@regcl
Copy link

regcl commented May 23, 2013

Love the way you make over emacs! Woo Woo! Want desperately to use!

Have these problems:

256 colors do not work:
regcl / term-plus-el.256color.pl.fails
https://gist.github.com/regcl/5636265

make under eshell throws a compile error:
term-plus-el.eshell.compile.error
https://gist.github.com/regcl/5636274

make under bash generates warnings:
regcl / term-plus-el.make.warning
https://gist.github.com/regcl/5636280

Using
OS X 10.8.2

Remote: emacs-24 @ mirror (git://github.com/emacsmirror/emacs)
Local: emacs-24 ~/tule/Darwin/emacs/

Commits in HEAD
465e137 * mirror/emacs-24 emacs-24 * lisp/descr-text.el (describe-char): Fix %d/%x typo. Ulrich Mueller 2 weeks

tarao added a commit that referenced this issue May 25, 2013
This addresses issue #9.
@tarao
Copy link
Owner

tarao commented May 25, 2013

Your main problem I assume is that xterm-256color.el didn't work on Emacs 24.3. Actually, xterm-256color.el did not support Emacs 24.3 since the color handling in term.el has been changed a lot. I added Emacs 24.3 support to xterm-256color.el in commit 22e18f1, so the problem should be solved.

I'm not sure why make in eshell gets error but not in bash. Are you sure that make in eshell invokes proper version of Emacs by emacs command? (In other words, does PATH environment variable in eshell includes the directory of Emacs 24.3?)

@regcl
Copy link
Author

regcl commented May 28, 2013

Sorry I closed the issue by accident ... reopening ...

Thank you. These changes fixed the warning and error produced by make. Now I have colors! YEAH!

However, control codes still appear in the buffer ...

term-plus-el 1

Note: a few of the colors are a bit off. For reference, here is how ./256color.pl looks in iTerm2 ...

iterm2 vanilla

@regcl regcl closed this as completed May 28, 2013
@regcl regcl reopened this May 28, 2013
@tarao
Copy link
Owner

tarao commented Jun 9, 2013

I investigated the remaining issues.

Control codes appearing in the buffer are color changing instructions, which are not supported by xterm-256color.el. To prevent those codes from appearing in the buffer, you can just ignore those instructions by putting the following line after (require 'term+).

(term+new-control-command "\033]4;" term+-st 'ignore)

Some colors do not appear correctly in terminal mode emacs (emacs -nw). I guess this is the issue between Emacs and the terminal since non-terminal mode emacs shows those colors perfectly. I have no idea how I can fix this.

@kenbeese
Copy link

if condition at 22e18f1#L0R119 does not work well on emacs version 24.2.

I think correct condition is as follows,

  (string< "24.3" emacs-version)

Could you fix it?

@tarao
Copy link
Owner

tarao commented Jun 12, 2013

You mean that emacs-version is something like 24.2.1 on Emacs 24.2 and so that (string< "24.2" emacs-version) at 22e18f1#L0R119 evaluates to t, which should be nil, right? That's true. The condition should be fixed.

I think the condition is enough to be (string< "24.2.5" emacs-version) since the development version after Emacs 24.2 includes the change made for term.el. (The change was made on 2012-06-28, before the Emacs 24.2 release but it didn't included in Emacs 24.2.)

Anyway, thank you for pointing it out.

tarao added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2013
tarao added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2013
This addresses issue #9.
@kenbeese
Copy link

Oh, I didn't know that. Since I'm using only 24.3.1 and 24.2.1, I thought the new color setting was made at 24.3.

Thank you for the fixing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants