From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some xterm-256color face colors too bright? Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:25:27 +0200 Message-ID: <01c507ca$Blat.v2.4$c3c54200@zahav.net.il> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107199916 4279 80.91.229.6 (31 Jan 2005 19:31:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 31 20:31:49 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CvhH2-0003lq-00 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:31:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CvhTn-0006Lo-PB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:44:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CvhSm-00062w-Er for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:43:56 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CvhSh-000617-0p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:43:54 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CvhSg-00060D-Uj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:43:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CvhEt-0006Cq-IF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:29:36 -0500 Original-Received: from zaretski (IGLD-83-130-246-36.inter.net.il [83.130.246.36]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id AKW70137 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:29:17 +0200 (IST) Original-To: stktrc X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 2.4 In-reply-to: (message from stktrc on Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:07:59 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:32679 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:32679 > From: stktrc > Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:07:59 +0200 > > The default colors of some faces become very bright, bordering on > too bright to be readable, when using an xterm-256color terminal > with light background (correctly detect in frame-background-mode). > Such faces are for example font-lock-string-face and > compilation-warning-face. If you type "M-x customize-face RET font-lock-string-face RET", what color name do you see in the Custom buffer? The default color for that face on light-background displays with more than 88 colors is "RosyBrown". I cannot see how this could be so bright as to annoy you. Could it be that the background color is actually the problem (Emacs doesn't touch the background color in a non-windowed session, it uses the color that it found)? You might also start a windowed Emacs session with a light background and compare the colors for that face in the two sessions, both for background and foreground colors. If you do that, what do you see? > I guess that this is not related to the individual face selections, > but rather to the algorithm by which colors are mapped onto XTerms > colors. Any hints on which parts of Emacs to look in to tune this? The code that does it is in lisp/term/xterm.el. But I don't think that code is to blame: all it does is register the 256 colors with their RGB values, which cannot possibly cause such problems.