57416 2004-07-17 14:39 0000 mutt: slang and transparency 2005-08-17 13:23:54 0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Gentoo Linux Ebuilds unspecified All Linux RESOLVED FIXED P2 trivial --- 1 bjoern.michaelsen@gmail.com agriffis@gentoo.org ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com mmokrejs@ribosome.natur.cuni.cz net-mail@gentoo.org sithglan@stud.uni-erlangen.de taviso@gentoo.org bjoern.michaelsen@gmail.com 2004-07-17 14:39:33 0000 The ebuild mutt-1.5.6-r2 says "If you want a transparent background, please merge mutt with USE=-slang." However, I use USE="slang" and have a transparent background when I have: export COLORFGBG="default;default" set in my enviroment. So the "If you want a transparent background, please merge mutt with USE=-slang." warning should be replaced by a the following statement: "If you want a transparent background, please merge mutt with USE=-slang or set COLORFGBG="default;default" in you enviroment. This can be done by executing echo 'export COLORFGBG="default;default"' >> ~/.bashrc." Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. export COLORFGBG="default;default" 2. mutt Actual Results: mutt with transparency Expected Results: The ebuild says: "mutt without transparency" agriffis@gentoo.org 2004-08-17 08:23:27 0000 Could you either explain the COLORFGBG variable or point to additional documentation? I don't understand the ramifications of setting it manually, and I don't want to put advice in the ebuild without fully understanding it. Ciaran, any thoughts here? ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com 2004-08-17 09:35:33 0000 If COLORFGBG contains the string 'default' as the last value, it's effectively unusable (default could mean light or dark, or maybe some random colour). I'm guessing that if mutt / slang can't handle COLORFGBG cleanly, it just gives up and doesn't try to do anything at all with the background... Setting it to default;default won't do anything majorly screwy, it's just not a very good solution. It would be much better for mutt to provide some way to make it ignore the background and use transparent, even if background detection was available. bjoern.michaelsen@gmail.com 2004-08-17 11:26:06 0000 I just tried a few permutations. It seems that mutt/slang just care that COLORFGBG is set at all: For: export COLORFGBG="default;light" export COLORFGBG="default;dark" export COLORFGBG="default;aa" export COLORFGBG="aa;default" transparency works. For: export COLORFGBG="aa;aa" it doesnt work. So the tip in the ebuild might be to set COLORFGBG to anything valid to get transparency working ... ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com 2004-08-17 11:34:30 0000 Try two integers from 0..15, like COLORFGBG="15;0" sithglan@stud.uni-erlangen.de 2004-08-18 01:29:14 0000 Add the following to your profile: export COLORFGBG="default;default" for borne shell style shells or setenv COLORFGBG "default;default" for C-style shells and it should work like a charm Greetings, Thomas agriffis@gentoo.org 2004-08-18 08:42:34 0000 This makes it sound like slang is related to rxvt. Is that the case? Also, does the default COLORFGBG setting from rxvt allow mutt+slang to be transparent? agriffis@gentoo.org 2004-10-25 12:37:06 0000 *** Bug 68625 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** mmokrejs@ribosome.natur.cuni.cz 2005-08-07 17:27:18 0000 I might be wrong, but I think slang was invented as a tiny variant of curses/ncurses with midnight commander, because not everybody had a a good curses library on the host. Yes, many people had termcap still. I'm not talking much about Linux here but rather other Unixes. Anyway, mc(1) had slang in its source tree, so if it did not find curses it failovered to slang. I believe on ncurses is much better and I don't see much reason why slang should be preferred. ncurses offers a lot more. Why have two libs and term definitions? agriffis@gentoo.org 2005-08-17 13:23:54 0000 ok, mutt-1.5.10 now ignores USE=slang, preferring to always use ncurses.