[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#605065: Bug#607662: Bug#605065: Bug#607662: ncurses-base: backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console



On 2010-12-27 09:52 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote:

> I see two basic options:
>
> 1) plain cons25 variant: current sysvinit, ncurses
>    and kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-6, freebsd-utils 8.1-2
>
> It does not conform to debian policy, the backspace/delete key is
> somewhat broken on console and somewhat broken when connection to
> other systems from console
>
> 2) cons25-debian variant: needs patched sysvinit, patched ncurses,
>    and kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-7, freebsd-utils 8.1-3
>
> It does conform to debian policy, the backspace/delete key works
> on console, it is needed to set TERM when connection to other systems
> from console and is somewhat broken when connection is made to other
> systems directly from console.

It seems to be a bit more broken than in the situation in 1), though.
For instance, programs that expect ^H to mean "delete previous
character" (this seems to include nano, for instance) work fine in 1),
but most text editors will be broken in 2) when run remotely.

> The cons25-debian seems be fine for me, as it should be only local
> change for one release of Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. The next one will not
> use it.

Any name is fine with me as long as ncurses upstream accepts it.

> And there is a third option, mixture of both above.
> As a default use the plain cons25 variant. Additionaly provide
> cons25-debian entry in ncurses and special debian keymap in freebsd-utils.
> By default it will work as variant 1, but there is a possibility
> to set TERM to cons25-debian and set keymap which would generate the
> correct sequences for cons25-debian.

Only one keymap, or several of them?  I would not like having to use US
keyboard layout for correct backspace/delete keys.

> This variant needs current sysvinit, patched ncurses, patched kfreebsd-8
> and patched freebsd-utils.
>
> My personal order of preferences is 3, 1, 2.
> All seems better compared to current status.

I agree with that.

Cheers,
       Sven



Reply to: