Xterm, rxvt, mrxvt, etc....
Sun May 6 14:49:00 GMT 2007
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Thomas Dickey wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>> The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off this
>>> mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an EX-terminal. The
>>> terminal is terminal.
>> thanks for agreeing with me. It has no maintainer.
> Not so fast, Thomas. I did not and do not agree with your previous posts:
> neither of your messages claimed that "upstream rxvt has no maintainer". (If
> they did, then I would have agreed with that.) Your messages claimed that
> rxvt had no cygwin maintainer. That claim is false: I am the cygwin
> maintainer for rxvt.
I don't much care for the role of "cygwin maintainer" in a discussion
related to _support_, since you're deliberatly confusing the issue of
putting the file on someone's disk in contrast to making it work.
When I've seen - say - more than 10% of your work in the latter, you'll
have something to argue about. You're not there.
> Don't try to retcon this thread.
that remark reflects poorly on you.
For the casual reader, google suggests that Charles Wilson called me a
>>> Frankly, I prefer rxvt-unicode on X -- even in non-unicode mode -- because
>> yes (does cygwin finally have unicode support? - no one's mentioned it
>> on this list at all).
> No, cygwin does not. Cygwin's rxvt-unicode port has limited unicode support
> because Thomas Wolff provided me with a patch (to rxvt-unicode) that shims
> unicode support by intercepting certain X calls.
You're apparently still confused: the terminal emulator can certainly
implement something, but if the applications running in it can't (except
as implied, for self-contained locale support), then it's of limited use.
Thomas E. Dickey
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin-xfree