Akib Azmain Turja writes: > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >>> From: Akib Azmain Turja >>> Cc: 57728@debbugs.gnu.org >>> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:03:04 +0600 >>> >>> > Let me turn the table and ask you: why do you think that '\' is not >>> > the usual continuation glyph that Emacs always produces when the width >>> > of a screen line on a TTY frame is exceeded? >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> OK, OK. This title is misleading. Showing the continuation glyph is >>> not wrong, but it is unexpected, because Emacs doesn't write to the >>> bottom-right corner. >> >> I've seen these continuation glyphs on every TTY display where I ever >> used Emacs, so I'd consider it a surprise, if not a bug, that on some >> TTYs those continuation glyphs were absent. They should be there to >> indicate to the user that the line is continued. >> >>> Perhaps I don't have the ability to express the problem in character, so >>> I'm trying to pixel. Can you please spend some seven and half minutes >>> to watch the bug in the video I attached? >> >> Sorry, I cannot want videos of this format. > > What format should I use? AFAIK, ogv is a free format. How about > asciicast (made with asciinema)? Looks like others have figured out the problem; do I really need to explain it? -- Akib Azmain Turja Find me on Mastodon at @akib@hostux.social. This message is signed by me with my GnuPG key. Its fingerprint is: 7001 8CE5 819F 17A3 BBA6 66AF E74F 0EFA 922A E7F5