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

Bug#569227: ncurses-base: break handling of ctrl-c in xterm and rxvt using bash

Am 10.02.2010 um 22:32 schrieb Helmut Grohne:

> Package: ncurses-base
> Version: 5.7+20090803-2
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks unrelated software
> ctrl-c does no longer cause SIGINT.
> Debugging this issue:
> When I create a new xterm (or rxvt) as a fork from my windowmanager
> (awesome) the terminal shows the broken behaviour.
> I have still some xterms that are not affected open. Those were started
> in 2009.

Before or after you upgraded ncurses-base?  That package has not been
touched for more than five months.

> Using strace on both working and a broken xterm show that both send \3
> to the terminal fd when I press ctrl-c.
> stty on a working xterm looks like:
> speed 38400 baud; line = 0;
> On a broken xterm it looks like:
> speed 38400 baud; line = 0;
> -brkint -imaxbel

Here it looks exactly the same as in your "broken" xterm, and ^C works
fine anyway.

> Using stty brkint imaxbel or stty sane does not solve the issue. Also
> stty intr ^C does not help.

stty sane should remove the "-brkint -imaxbel".  Does it?

> Starting a xterm from an working xterm results in a working xterm.
> Starting a xterm from a broken xterm results in a broken xterm.
> Starting a xterm, starting vim within it and then doing :!xterm<CR>
> produces a working xterm.
> Saving the environment of a working xterm, loading it in a broken xterm
> and then starting a new xterm results in a broken xterm.
> Do you have any other ideas for debugging the issue?

Not really, but you could send the output of 'env' and
'xrdb -query | grep -i xterm'.  Do you see any differences between
working and broken xterms?

> If you feel that I have assigned the bug report to the wrong package,
> please reassign it to the correct package.

I feel it is assigned to the wrong package, but I have no idea what the
right package could be.

> Kernel: Linux

Ever thought of upgrading this two years old, totally unsupported kernel?


Reply to: