Re: I don't want to use xterm, why am I forced to use it any way?
> Don't forget to specify a number of options which are required --
> requireing *all* xterm options to be supported would be overkill
> and pretty difficult to achieve.
A new suggestion: why don't we specify the required options in the
Debian Policy? Terminal emulators which are compliant to the Policy
can provide /etc/alternative/x-terminal-emulator.
The policy may be defined as a subset of Xterm options. We can apply
patch to, for example, gnome-terminal to support it. Since the
resemblance of options will benefit all users, we can send the patch
to the upstream.
P.S. I think we still *need* a way of USER-LEVEL (not SITE-LEVEL)
configuration like /usr/bin/sensible-x-terminal and $XTERM. I say
we *need*, not *want*, because we *need* to choose a specific terminal
if the terminal is the only one which supports our native language.
People from many countries can be users of one Debian box --- this
is likely to occur in Asia. (Though this is also likely in Europe,
European people can use common terminal emulators by changing fonts
(iso8859-?) which can be achieved in user-level by ~/.Xresources file.)
I think Debian needs a standard way to do that so that softwares
which require terminals can obey it.
I read the previous discussion about sensible-x-terminal and I think
the disadvantage of the idea is that shell script wrapper is slow.
However, if we are to introduce shell script to absorb the difference
of options, why not introduce user-level configuration? For Asian
people, it is not only a mere preference of users but also a necessity
to use their native language.
Tomohiro KUBOTA <firstname.lastname@example.org>