From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#33398: 26.1, netbsd-8; Hi Lock Faces, Hi Green B, default setting suggestion Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 18:46:27 +0200 Message-ID: <837eh1jeak.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9B715204-BE6D-4F02-B484-1EA9EDACE0EB@scratch.space> <87wope15gh.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <4D07BB6C-98A9-4EC2-BB37-097D5D753E53@scratch.space> <87wopbzeuy.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87d0r04tmg.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87sgzv747k.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <740AF1DA-7EDB-4310-8C6E-F7944D714513@scratch.space> <87sgzuca5o.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87a7m0hi5t.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <837eh4gpjd.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7lyi29o.fsf@mail.linkov.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1543165367 26691 195.159.176.226 (25 Nov 2018 17:02:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 17:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: van@scratch.space, 33398@debbugs.gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 25 18:02:42 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxns-0006ky-4U for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 18:02:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60546 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxpy-0002Sy-JK for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 12:04:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60867) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxj8-0003rZ-Vg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:57:50 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxYk-0007hc-NA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:47:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43290) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxYk-0007hV-Ik for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:47:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxYk-00029T-ES for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:47:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 16:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 33398 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 33398-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B33398.15431643948237 (code B ref 33398); Sun, 25 Nov 2018 16:47:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 33398) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2018 16:46:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47548 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxYH-00028n-Mx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:46:33 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49162) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxYG-00028b-Tn for 33398@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:46:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxY8-00075k-Mm for 33398@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:46:27 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:54839) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxY8-00075b-K5; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:46:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1521 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gQxY8-0003wl-8M; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 11:46:24 -0500 In-reply-to: <87a7lyi29o.fsf@mail.linkov.net> (message from Juri Linkov on Sat, 24 Nov 2018 23:29:15 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:152759 Archived-At: > From: Juri Linkov > Cc: van@scratch.space, 33398@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 23:29:15 +0200 > > >> (defface hi-pink > >> - '((((background dark)) (:background "pink" :foreground "black")) > >> - (t (:background "pink"))) > >> + '((((min-colors 88) (background dark)) > >> + (:background "pink" :foreground "black")) > >> + (((background dark)) (:background "red" :foreground "black")) > >> + (((min-colors 88)) (:background "pink")) > >> + (t (:background "red"))) > >> "Face for hi-lock mode." > >> :group 'hi-lock-faces) > > > > Thanks for working on this, but unfortunately changing the default > > colors for Emacs faces is not that easy (which is why we do that only > > very rarely). > > I understand that face changing is very sensitive area, so I don't insist > on these changes if the result is worse. What I was trying to do is to > add 2 more default colors: the current 4 is too small number of the default > background colors, so adding 2 colors will at least cover all available > 6 non-black-white colors on a 8-color TTY. Then I don't understand why you also changed the faces we had already. Leaving them alone will lower the risk that someone will become annoyed by the changes. > emacs -Q -nw --color=8 -f list-colors-display > > displays a list of 8 colors, good. But running > > emacs -Q -nw --color=16 -f list-colors-display > > displays a list of 256 colors, the same number of colors properly displayed by > > emacs -Q -nw --color=256 -f list-colors-display > > Is this a bug in Emacs? Not a bug, a subtlety: the only numeric argument you can reliably submit to --color= is 8, because it alone has a standard set of termcap/terminfo commands to set and reset colors. Maybe we should amend the documentation so that people don't expect other numbers to work. > Could you recommend a better way to test a 16-color palette on a > TTY? Use a 16-color terminfo entry. > For the new faces I copied the defface spec conditions from the existing > faces hi-yellow and hi-green that have separate conditions for less than > 88 colors. But we could drop unnecessary conditions here as well. That some face does have such conditional color definitions doesn't mean another face also should. It depends on the results we get on color-challenged terminals via color translation.