[gpm] gpm patch

[Nico Schottelius]

Hello Ingo,

Ingo Brueckl [Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 09:52:00AM +0100]:
> You're probably aware of the problems with the -p option. One can't be happy
> with it, nor can one without it.

I must confess that I've never used -p myself ;-)

> Generally, not using -p is the better choice ... until it comes to bold
> colors on same background color where the cursor suddenly disappears. This
> annoys me for years now, and I thought it would be nice to have an option
> that can handle both cases.
> 
> To fix this in the kernel is probably the better way (and I will try as soon
> as have time to search for it - no idea whether this will be accepted), but
> for the moment it was easier to patch gpm.
> 
> For my personal convenience I abused option -p to act the new way, but you
> certainly will introduce a new option for this if you decide to accept the
> patch.
> 
> The idea for the patch is simple. During selection it'll be checked whether
> the cursor is on a bold color character with same background color. If it
> isn't, we'll do nothing and thus act like no option -p is given. If it does,
> we'll paste and act like option -p were given. This way, we can follow the
> cursor without being annoyed otherwise.

Well, sounds like a sane idea to avoid the problem.

> The patch is included. Please tell me whether you like it and if/when you
> plan to release a new version of gpm.

I saw it and what I really dislike is another dependency on Linux being
introduced. This makes it somehow hard for me:

  - do not want to include it into gpm-1-*, as it's a new feature
  - do not want to include it into gpm-2-*, as it should be less linux dependend

Maybe we can just add a new branch gpm-[12]-ingo (or whatever name), which
contains that (and maybe future) changes made by you.

If you want to have that patch in gpm, I would advise you to subscribe to the ML,
answer to the ML and create your own branch in git and tell me under
which name you would like me to pull your changes.

> (The second patch I included answers the question in the Makefile whether a
> libgpm.so link is necessary. During configuring ncurses I found that it
> indeed is necessary, otherwise -lgpm won't be found.)

Hmm, I've not seen this being broken in gentoo, so I'm wondering how you made
ncurses fail to find the right lib. Did you run ldconfig after you install gpm?

Regarding the next release: gpm-1.20.6 will be released soon, including the
small patches made my Mike (git log 1.20.5..master) and nothing else.

Sincerly,

Nico

-- 
Think about Free and Open Source Software (FOSS).
http://nico.schottelius.org/documentations/foss/the-term-foss/

PGP: BFE4 C736 ABE5 406F 8F42  F7CF B8BE F92A 9885 188C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/gpm/attachments/20090203/c29e8e26/attachment.pgp>