From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Dec 14 16:49:03 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Dec 2022 21:49:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41905 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5Zcd-0007DK-7F for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:49:03 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:43824) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5Zca-0007Cx-5m for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:49:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5Zca-0002Bx-0L for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:49:00 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-x335.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::335]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5ZcV-0005al-Sm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:48:58 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-x335.google.com with SMTP id db10-20020a0568306b0a00b0066d43e80118so2574513otb.1 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:48:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=g5fUDxALTCRUCbQszGpC1wn2AhIHKb19w2VvMNW+V2c=; b=NXzPUzxE3m15jyJYYfNC2l/61irIrzyb9RSAWwZWQxAp48hR9op8sPNRLbRrmow+ST +iXi9Qb+vW6PJ+wCYSrArkUeW/CgrF7UkgG9O9G9EzTIYSGBa/+Mtjns8Nfc/Y8oz6XT 9k4j9qfN4zaAsOWQvmoJIhPzZUfbQ2w9nR4vT8UeYt6emOlPyebWde9EU4Mq6+JTVkEM zGDi5vJNKKICP0ajF0bCjxZB+p1M31x8exhSUJaSlv/dp2VGA8vilw2PVFzbfPpIURUW mmmuE7kiBPOJnMEpKMrF2I6LDLD5U87Uk0gMRTiloFGhGdSV7ih1k67KoKhWVpS9z9/F 8h9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=g5fUDxALTCRUCbQszGpC1wn2AhIHKb19w2VvMNW+V2c=; b=eIlNhxFBD7fefIaNcM9Pzknao1WF64j8b5f+JrtHbEkugcAEA7fdsGlAp9NqTarYuK /gSKGkxysOxiSqvQ69pEAaCcqEhS5n7928B4fcFS3aPA0xQDawxPSuxRoP0X6Ha56Rvo cdnMJubAWcFdUcLUAWhybecbrTfPV4xfptB/nbZzXxCz9dw17feIjm/MkwZNqSecJrFi a+qbq0HpnF4gJkWf9QttaLishrceBhXWRkz2N8rvJIz2ubFlQpULjSqxSpb9VnY4p0AD nwmq+opiUjtS0EOAfBRTFs4CsHoaV37OzsQZuUnCy5Bxa8J24RCl49Qj6tSBIfAvOx0C MEGg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkptvWUZtrFKNXFXWFQ3/yYYRQbIS1DuFTpDgnlYm1f6TnMs4vf JBSHHnarJl+10mW0xa8g/5hxMZH0i/6IIFlcA9mHCAyO3s0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5dqaiHOZBzm5AR7d1NZA5U9GsTrvVtPkXT3d1T1FUGiqknt/D1JpYOo1g9UbXPLNbPlFRPpEdfCNMw/f1BCJI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:56e:b0:670:594f:aa07 with SMTP id f14-20020a056830056e00b00670594faa07mr6929543otc.282.1671054531548; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:48:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Len Trigg Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:48:35 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c0d92a05efd0b37c" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::335; envelope-from=lenbok@gmail.com; helo=mail-ot1-x335.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) --000000000000c0d92a05efd0b37c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I often run emacs in the terminal, and usually this is inside wezterm as my terminal emulator. Recently wezterm has added support for the modifyOtherKeys xterm extension, and since then emacs M-SPC has stopped working in the terminal (instead it inserts "~32"). I can get M-SPC working again in wezterm by preventing emacs from enabling modifyOtherKeys, either by setting xterm-extra-capabilities to nil or by stubbing out xterm--init-modify-other-keys. Initially we thought that this may be a problem with wezterm, but then I tried replicating with xterm and exactly the same thing happens. This suggests to me that the issue is with emacs rather than xterm or wezterm. To replicate: 1) run: xterm -e emacs -nw -Q 2) in say *scratch* check whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32 (for me it inserts ~32) To replicate disabling modifyOtherKeys: 1) put the following into $HOME/test-dir/init.el ------ ;; Dirty hack to not use xterm modifyOtherKeys feature (defun my-disable-xterm--init-modify-other-keys (orig-fun &rest args)) (advice-add #'xterm--init-modify-other-keys :around #'my-disable-xterm--init-modify-other-keys) ------ 2) run: xterm -e emacs -nw --init-dir=$HOME/test-dir 3) in say *scratch* check whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32 (for me it works correctly) This seems to demonstrate the out of the box behaviour being broken, but I don't understand enough about terminals etc to know whether there is some other factor at play. Relevant link where this was discussed: https://github.com/CyberShadow/term-keys/issues/14 Cheers, Len. --000000000000c0d92a05efd0b37c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I often run emacs in the terminal, and= usually this is inside wezterm as my
terminal emulator. Recently wezter= m has added support for the
modifyOtherKeys xterm extension, and since t= hen emacs M-SPC has stopped
working in the terminal (instead it inserts = "~32").

I can get M-SPC working again in wezterm by preven= ting emacs from enabling
modifyOtherKeys, either by setting xterm-extra-= capabilities to nil or by
stubbing out xterm--init-modify-other-keys. In= itially we thought that
this may be a problem with wezterm, but then I t= ried replicating with
xterm and exactly the same thing happens. This sug= gests to me that the
issue is with emacs rather than xterm or wezterm.
To replicate:

1) run: xterm -e emacs -nw -Q
2) in say *scra= tch* check whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32
(for me it inse= rts ~32)

To replicate disabling modifyOtherKeys:
1) put the following into $HOME/test-dir/init.el
------
;; Dirt= y hack to not use xterm modifyOtherKeys feature
(defun my-disable-xterm-= -init-modify-other-keys (orig-fun &rest args))
(advice-add #'xte= rm--init-modify-other-keys :around
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 #'my-disable-xterm--init-modify-other-keys)
------
2) run:= xterm -e emacs -nw --init-dir=3D$HOME/test-dir
3) in say *scratch* chec= k whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32
(for me it works correct= ly)

This seems to demonstrate the out of the box behaviour being bro= ken, but
I don't understand enough about terminals etc to know wheth= er there is
some other factor at play.

Relevant link where this w= as discussed:
https://github.com/CyberShadow/term-keys/issues/14

<= /div>
Cheers,
Len.

--000000000000c0d92a05efd0b37c-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 01:42:05 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 06:42:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42406 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5hwT-0007Ap-29 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 01:42:05 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60388) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5hwN-0007AM-Oi for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 01:42:03 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5hwI-0004t3-4p; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 01:41:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=rK58MPout2Jfumb5aznAmKWVlZ86tIaX/qYc/RWEp+g=; b=SdQOOeUQoAwu JppXChw2NxUWaTRJEAQw8e7iZxQjjSBvTFBSC/+ioRZ8EHidK2aUOAf0u9fHRpgulRI3BKpQcoECs 1NsMYhgCJt8o7aG0RO9iJZZeH/UimVr09BdaMcr1gmGPm3/X+1/NNEH0+Fw12GO77/PmR8QK4hB4m vNS2dd9uHM46vXbRSQRU7hjVK5jlic5/vE1evM7FJXZAP5LcFvicFdSun6YwQGDE8dMvsz/fIfc0A zVZVJcjRuPYtdq+fLuLlSsC1YcGQa6XFpwtggx0mU4qjGdjaS/jqRjNBPcrcUYU+In30CFH2Emh2R YNWwUpY+STmUyCrDgpFZ0w==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5hwD-0000Xc-Nh; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 01:41:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 08:41:48 +0200 Message-Id: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Len Trigg In-Reply-To: (message from Len Trigg on Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:48:35 +1300) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Len Trigg > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 10:48:35 +1300 > > I often run emacs in the terminal, and usually this is inside wezterm as my > terminal emulator. Recently wezterm has added support for the > modifyOtherKeys xterm extension, and since then emacs M-SPC has stopped > working in the terminal (instead it inserts "~32"). > > I can get M-SPC working again in wezterm by preventing emacs from enabling > modifyOtherKeys, either by setting xterm-extra-capabilities to nil or by > stubbing out xterm--init-modify-other-keys. Initially we thought that > this may be a problem with wezterm, but then I tried replicating with > xterm and exactly the same thing happens. This suggests to me that the > issue is with emacs rather than xterm or wezterm. > > To replicate: > > 1) run: xterm -e emacs -nw -Q > 2) in say *scratch* check whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32 > (for me it inserts ~32) > > To replicate disabling modifyOtherKeys: > > 1) put the following into $HOME/test-dir/init.el > ------ > ;; Dirty hack to not use xterm modifyOtherKeys feature > (defun my-disable-xterm--init-modify-other-keys (orig-fun &rest args)) > (advice-add #'xterm--init-modify-other-keys :around > #'my-disable-xterm--init-modify-other-keys) > ------ > 2) run: xterm -e emacs -nw --init-dir=$HOME/test-dir > 3) in say *scratch* check whether M-SPC works or whether it inserts ~32 > (for me it works correctly) > > This seems to demonstrate the out of the box behaviour being broken, but > I don't understand enough about terminals etc to know whether there is > some other factor at play. > > Relevant link where this was discussed: > https://github.com/CyberShadow/term-keys/issues/14 I'm not sure I understand: it sounds like you are saying that M-SPC doesn't work in xterm, either? (Which version of xterm. btw?) So the question now becomes: how did it work before that change in wezterm for you, and why did modifyOtherKeys feature broke it? Which terminal file in lisp/term/ was/is Emacs loading at startup when you use wezterm? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 03:39:22 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 08:39:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42522 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5jly-0008S6-0U for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 03:39:22 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f170.google.com ([209.85.167.170]:40634) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5jlv-0008S0-U8 for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 03:39:20 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f170.google.com with SMTP id k189so4734578oif.7 for <60077@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 00:39:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xu+OtJcpHtX5XH8jlKCPgNtY4QPG1WDMwy3X4hUTzEg=; b=IawnPvUAFXfhLME06iGSkQV5Ssx556vaiId/6+qT0hkgli+JTz0h9BRxMjJq7Y8HtG r6xJisjzuk2bQNC8xJDXnZagbftikrFilqTqp+8C0rEJRq3m4xe+F+8t4aFxN/pe8Hh2 7qongRO5CWyL8+WgwmZBqs69YbmPc1Uw1XKcFcVN0rI2oipfEPx9kXvaCj15pXsOt4Ge SLhYeFOU8iUDSVSGqv8Wuwpc2b5R0NXfth1OfgKDk4cCUUct8XL/W0RMy4/N+zH9pVPg 6FplZxPfnVgavwpZ1ooslyZxGy7F8AdhzmtioGEBqlS2aqdPQby9tfUwO1tojMTwBlbT Ub0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=xu+OtJcpHtX5XH8jlKCPgNtY4QPG1WDMwy3X4hUTzEg=; b=viGbiyX2JFRfX+x8vC9bRCQIFdtOBKKe6wUBa0K8HIrwRvcQTLqfgtLnWwf0t48/gZ 9cFN2ItYBHXpAMRvE3uaBjVq+xkVkgKGCSdnuBs/a7s8h07y77Z9ea4yv7EiO5gBeqmD 3TavyXQLodD1f+pHVz604MyoHaBz5NM72eZeBoLFLrKF23iz7cvQvL6AzITRl5wQITi6 ax4bGzkIErFN+gOCvAiCSfSmUyRUai+M58EcVweuI1/DlEmAyICDosS67IdI8khRi0WQ Lkd+5GckEa1JMnZhZuT/UoyRsgT3b5MejvdighOQXBwnRLCaQyRDR723GZk2VIzXRWfG Wkfw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmWMrk1YMKRPRrkQP5tpJObUKM/af5EaYYldhIFaITq053Cgxq8 7UXW9MOzTRXRt0BfM0PGd25LkVrXEA8QiIXR2IpObAgDAf0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf528yOXqR0C/UJkprQuh61G8CZho2ifJx/B+/RTwKBiTJlHDrHXYZuMDxSOtgg393LNR18pNdaZR5aDpG2lX3M= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:d:b0:35b:cfac:bc16 with SMTP id u13-20020a056808000d00b0035bcfacbc16mr303989oic.64.1671093553842; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 00:39:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> From: Len Trigg Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:38:57 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a9cf6705efd9c9eb" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --000000000000a9cf6705efd9c9eb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 19:41, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I'm not sure I understand: it sounds like you are saying that M-SPC > doesn't work in xterm, either? (Which version of xterm. btw?) Yes, I am saying M-SPC does not work in xterm (which reports its version as XTerm(353)). So the > question now becomes: how did it work before that change in wezterm > for you, and why did modifyOtherKeys feature broke it? > I don't think it worked before the change in wezterm (I haven't used xterm for years) -- I really just tested with xterm to see whether the issue was specific to wezterm, and was surprised to find xterm already broken. Which terminal file in lisp/term/ was/is Emacs loading at startup when > you use wezterm? > For both xterm and wezterm I have the $TERM variable set to "xterm-direct", so they both use lisp/term/xterm.el (which is consistent with my hack of xterm--init-modify-other-keys affecting the behaviour of both). My hypothesis is that under both xterm and wezterm emacs is sending the terminal initialization code for turning on modifyOtherKeys, but the older version of wezterm just ignored it (and M-SPC worked). But now they have added modifyOtherKeys support, it is behaving like xterm (i.e. broken) by sending M-SPC with an encoding that emacs doesn't recognize. Do you think it's just a matter of the dolist on line 466 of xterm.el needing additional entries (I don't see one there for M-SPC)? Cheers, Len. --000000000000a9cf6705efd9c9eb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 19:41, Eli Zaretsk= ii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
I'm not sure I under= stand: it sounds like you are saying that M-SPC
doesn't work in xterm, either?=C2=A0 (Which version of xterm. btw?)

Yes, I am saying M-SPC does not work in xterm = (which reports its version as XTerm(353)).


So the
question now becomes: how did it work before that change in wezterm
for you, and why did modifyOtherKeys feature broke it?

I don't think it worked before the change in wezterm (I= haven't used xterm for years) -- I really just tested with xterm to se= e whether the issue was specific to wezterm, and was surprised to find xter= m already broken.


Which terminal file in lisp/term/ was/is Emacs loading at startup when
you use wezterm?

For both xterm an= d wezterm I have the $TERM variable set to "xterm-direct", so th= ey both use lisp/term/xterm.el (which is consistent with my hack of xterm--= init-modify-other-keys affecting the behaviour of both). My hypothesis is t= hat under both xterm and wezterm emacs is sending the terminal initializati= on code for turning on modifyOtherKeys, but the older version of wezterm ju= st ignored it (and M-SPC worked). But now they have added modifyOtherKeys s= upport, it is behaving like xterm (i.e. broken) by sending M-SPC with an en= coding that emacs doesn't recognize. Do you think it's just a matte= r of the dolist on line 466 of xterm.el needing additional entries (I don&#= 39;t see one there for M-SPC)?

Cheers,
Len.



=C2=A0=
--000000000000a9cf6705efd9c9eb-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 03:57:25 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 08:57:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42545 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5k3Q-0000G7-Li for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 03:57:24 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f177.google.com ([209.85.167.177]:45694) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5k3P-0000Fz-15 for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 03:57:24 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f177.google.com with SMTP id t62so4732201oib.12 for <60077@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 00:57:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dELekB8gfF9ELHppAOvdcOgr+K47hSguHHxK0CjsLOM=; b=eRSNM1huaJqn18/TaZBcXNo4NQtuIz8SJcO1tYYParAAzF03DuX6/EBoB1ApXSFAOT zgA20dFKA9R1Z9UieUvQJU7bpFwGL0nsYZXGQi6sxyiW7R7FiDuHvf8Bdbkrad/UyXFS gqNxxKmImvVj7HI+uJSvwt3PT29gGRukypreSjJW3+oF7UQzdJ9aRGL9xh/uIBx7pdyP OXW7zLU37giy86f9b4Q9eUG5JGjJwvNgjWUKPz/9Cplx4+zOgmXmYHhJljQt0pwKUasW FfM7y+0nMbi7FbwbNS8gejhUSfY4ftJdm1cH0gHLH77/q4oD8ZfJsqu3Iq/hxq6JbgFB O5qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=dELekB8gfF9ELHppAOvdcOgr+K47hSguHHxK0CjsLOM=; b=gI7sa9VLdPbSDAzAcsMyFRXGnvVDW0jRULM152YjdqdtFaPCwhqOEsIdrT0F89xRY2 j44bVMeLvgJuOPpAvnFvosIFJIsjohTJqDlxdjWPkeqDyOT1t+yVL7n99w1/UXaaTebZ rHI9N/V72GLbibe1hj2Y3JhOl4srazT6kJIrQ19KCPeZXcGQgTPLJHk/P49XTyw9DGkd F5i3OhTolTmgwijbajaPwvh1xsbn8FshyAUw884zb9bLjqLN/yHGxXp3JP81fX5WOhGm HPoRAM9R55wC6LrX2OUQeSQkwh0rb6I3jHQR/mZF0mn9DaasGVI+0VTjijO9Fn/7Z9M9 wHIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnb9yu0vdudC7rpctx7bsHkru8NG0znKajKMLMTkPHLYhd8i2ly UYRxGXi+zkM1cGIdQwAldJGapg0Y+m0u1vLtO2I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6BwwMbFUd723RThsiORYyYcAg/TKcqp2Ea+IWwn8ceyc/B4nDitEf1pU+FwFEyVHovWvCYenfZIa3jFh14Xg4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:602:b0:34f:bcdf:b08f with SMTP id y2-20020a056808060200b0034fbcdfb08fmr242632oih.71.1671094637148; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 00:57:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: From: Len Trigg Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:57:00 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003bbe9305efda0a8d" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --0000000000003bbe9305efda0a8d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 21:38, Len Trigg wrote: > Do you think it's just a matter of the dolist on line 466 of xterm.el > needing additional entries (I don't see one there for M-SPC)? > For example, I see there looks to be an entry for C-M-SPC: (7 32 [?\C-\M-\s]) And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other modified-key escapes" on https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like: (3 32 [?\M-\s]) to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, but also that there are probably many many other sequences that aren't being handled. Cheers, Len. > --0000000000003bbe9305efda0a8d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 21:38, Len Trigg <lenbok@gmail.com> wrote:
Do you think it's just a matter of the dolist on line 466 o= f xterm.el needing additional entries (I don't see one there for M-SPC)= ?

For example, = I see there looks to be an entry for C-M-SPC:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(7 32 [?\C-\M-\s])
And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other= modified-key escapes" on https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-= keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(3 = 32 [?\M-\s])
to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "= \E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, but also that there are probably many man= y other sequences that aren't being handled.

Cheers,
Len.



<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
=C2=A0
--0000000000003bbe9305efda0a8d-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 04:07:07 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 09:07:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42572 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kCp-0000PH-4x for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:07:07 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:42390) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kCm-0000Ou-4g for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:07:06 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kCg-0005wy-DK; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:06:58 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=RWR80sODode1g2S0gtQtKkgMSbsqxK+zAkiyPjedxPE=; b=l4EWsdN3qLJC HcMDWOyVSJPMIFErAW8lQUDCNARNlRGXNlF1pILDrnZ00qrgScxas6Bu4WwoNxXeElhzFqLv+KxrU G3h28ZtlnfXJj5I2WIogs6VsCc4RnASfP3HCwjl4aIMdrSBUTm4u5AQEmo7WVeJ2LragTyt9zFoFc syTW2qjq+zMnwD6XD9twQVIJdzB2FwqU/VzC4qkE7Kav1tNv/CeUd639dp0O2a6MDOY0x9nC0pV6s J6dymcRdRveFqLG0avI+uLkMo0wNYuztzsLbEiwUvQMr9bvNamEctkfaZlUTcOVnkgEFSFLjUKhYL I4P26TcQL+jbedtCyLl/hg==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kCf-0005wk-UI; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:06:58 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:06:57 +0200 Message-Id: <83len9kpce.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Len Trigg In-Reply-To: (message from Len Trigg on Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:38:57 +1300) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Len Trigg > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:38:57 +1300 > Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org > > Which terminal file in lisp/term/ was/is Emacs loading at startup when > you use wezterm? > > For both xterm and wezterm I have the $TERM variable set to "xterm-direct", so they both use > lisp/term/xterm.el (which is consistent with my hack of xterm--init-modify-other-keys affecting the behaviour of > both). My hypothesis is that under both xterm and wezterm emacs is sending the terminal initialization code > for turning on modifyOtherKeys, but the older version of wezterm just ignored it (and M-SPC worked). But now > they have added modifyOtherKeys support, it is behaving like xterm (i.e. broken) by sending M-SPC with an > encoding that emacs doesn't recognize. Do you think it's just a matter of the dolist on line 466 of xterm.el > needing additional entries (I don't see one there for M-SPC)? I don't really know. But one solution is to disable modifyOtherKeys in your init file. Or maybe you could dig deeper into what xterm.el does with modifyOtherKeys support and tell why M-SPC fails. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 04:10:47 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 09:10:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42596 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kGN-0000SF-Hw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:10:47 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33024) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kGL-0000S7-IX for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:10:45 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kGG-0007Wv-6y; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:10:40 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=GZ79BXVKfJE6EVmeJ0eL2VrFoffFdSusp/qIbBA6QMc=; b=dXDaxXVfcdod uj3TAdQdCsMOClACo9+CIUZX2fiFbGp8eJIP7AVmNSu+BAvSrBFqmULLjb+sphU5xZ8BZRqAL/EyP fRWjBiugwVPqhs3erbsNGUtCXQs6/8LM2SlIQpwhmrI4lBn6f7G/ZxEWdD5sv2EeXoKgP5qwAuHa9 5iIZ/hFEMJhb023GgwtUcW5nkKUnbgTN0mNYF2FTl6nisZQL+0Qam1f9EAhkMaVPYIj/bAJb8YuzC KNegvS1/5iGELnJlGM1wZpQXY8GP1/uqjUjA/pdL/5x/ZCZ+K9nxOF2yhKlPL/UtbT8fy1of9bSdm S7PANb7wN1XvP20FCZwGNA==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p5kGF-0001B2-5c; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 04:10:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:10:39 +0200 Message-Id: <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Len Trigg In-Reply-To: (message from Len Trigg on Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:57:00 +1300) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Len Trigg > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 21:57:00 +1300 > Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 21:38, Len Trigg wrote: > > Do you think it's just a matter of the dolist on line 466 of xterm.el needing additional entries (I don't see > one there for M-SPC)? > > For example, I see there looks to be an entry for C-M-SPC: > (7 32 [?\C-\M-\s]) > And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other modified-key escapes" on > https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like: > (3 32 [?\M-\s]) > to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, If that fixes the problem, we could install it. > but also that there are probably > many many other sequences that aren't being handled. There's nothing wrong with solving this one problem at a time, right? Especially since we don't seem to have complaints about other sequences. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 15 14:49:22 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Dec 2022 19:49:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44570 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5uEM-0002ut-3Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 14:49:22 -0500 Received: from mail-oa1-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:40853) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p5uEI-0002un-Ls for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 14:49:20 -0500 Received: by mail-oa1-f41.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-14455716674so631423fac.7 for <60077@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:49:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TolznmhpdJIJMZhGPl+SnYi58ULoYoeyZRonshC3Mcw=; b=d2NDXBzOxFufDkE137kuCDBM4un6rOyFeY8PZ+jK5AydluCNUshFbWrfe51ZJmMpJv +sXOMDuiSuEx/uA7qIqGBhJ6ZI7Qo7RuK/FJyNJsT3ctGh5x1e6c6rGypkurYkjtY/H6 jcsYlAonRMzq7zEtUj4x11kvSqv5nLMmS9E7TESTkAh09bafIdcmSJlZP1ryD5GuHiR4 SpOZu0o3YqwMYhswSAT1Vv6PUDKpruVa69MBKv+ROCLjlA5+4aJYSpdTglxCvzWquNkM 3OJpPgTezXpQSJivrgqQc1er7FBn7cGFbZrGWiAYyOwCPHImWuZs1MaUjLg+EcyGkTfB GSog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=TolznmhpdJIJMZhGPl+SnYi58ULoYoeyZRonshC3Mcw=; b=IrvqKCfPgGncqIYEsyfg8Zqdl+cat7LBK/9FDbvgo/pX9Dyq/m1Q8v0UGLrgiKIacb mQ+fARE5lL/QbFslUf7R9fscI3lG3mqx5Ve/6cOrFGpDzbB1ZN15Beby+uwvzaPF8blI y61QyFyj1n4SOsiEMHZngIfE2x5PefaJj2MMOOXVcNCk9OiDt3qHf0ZsgMiwGvIjJSRN HQSnAK9RS0qT3zpcxwXxqJsVYt8EopcnJpbPEYP5msx02XXBWHOckHUa+ov+iZ+m+zXS C+AoA7NWxGJLs1UaYvSf4KjaIE0CVVsGMw7UpM6FEmk0bFlU/QzsNjiIFEnsx7nsw7QD tm9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmZmLI05xFR4NE/s9r0eZo8q6MKiDvzRlta1GIxNCJ1a3UU1Zsi 1RETmsVVvSzbPisxDLaXkWjnnSWjmZ79avAxMyA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXvJIN7d44Wz3AYnlElJjj8rWwlFFWyfdfjbb7iBBggrdkjPVjSPHd4N+mq3L28R1G2m58dvcsxcTSvVLYFslak= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:1b14:b0:143:74c2:f928 with SMTP id hl20-20020a0568701b1400b0014374c2f928mr349992oab.64.1671133751429; Thu, 15 Dec 2022 11:49:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> From: Len Trigg Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:48:54 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a04ce205efe3257e" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --000000000000a04ce205efe3257e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 22:10, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other > modified-key escapes" on > > https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that > emacs would need an entry like: > > (3 32 [?\M-\s]) > > to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, > > If that fixes the problem, we could install it. > I tried this out and it does fix the issue for me. BTW, have you tried to replicate the issue yourself? There's nothing wrong with solving this one problem at a time, right? > Especially since we don't seem to have complaints about other > sequences. > I suppose so, I'm just a little wary of fixing like this without understanding why it only seems to be an issue now or whether other guards are needed. For example, the commit log for this area shows Dan Nicolaescu adding more bindings in c0658ad46e4928ecdf6a14904073dc8a2fcfe862 and also bumping the xterm version number that is checked against, so he is probably knowledgeable about how this works. (I've tried to add him to the CC list using the email address in that commit) Cheers, Len. --000000000000a04ce205efe3257e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 22:10, Eli Zaretsk= ii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> And my wild specula= tion from looking at the example table "Other modified-key escapes&quo= t; on
> https://invisible-island.net/xter= m/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like: >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (= 3 32 [?\M-\s])
> to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for = M-SPC,

If that fixes the problem, we could install it.

I tried this out and it does fix the issue for me. BTW, have you t= ried to replicate the issue yourself?


There's nothing wrong w= ith solving this one problem at a time, right?
Especially since we don't seem to have complaints about other
sequences.
=C2=A0
I suppose so, I'm just= a little wary of fixing like this without understanding why it=20 only seems to be an issue now or whether other guards are needed. For examp= le, the commit log for this area shows Dan Nicolaescu adding more bindings = in c0658ad46e4928ecdf6a14904073dc8a2fcfe862 and also bumping the xterm vers= ion number that is checked against, so he is probably knowledgeable about h= ow this works. (I've tried to add him to the CC list using the email ad= dress in that commit)

Cheers,
Len.


=C2=A0
--000000000000a04ce205efe3257e-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Dec 16 01:52:44 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Dec 2022 06:52:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47505 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p64aK-0004pv-69 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 01:52:44 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53700) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p64aE-0004pl-GE for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 01:52:42 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p64a7-0002LH-5T; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 01:52:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=IvGzBpaVedlQvc9SE31UUpvyc/Scqppc09D9RQ1CGkE=; b=F+0H0mE48dVq 5TikfSNTq0cl7Y5FQu8N1tpc+90UmYmHskwUsY52lqs5/mhLj/z8SgTdN0q4BM4IZS2S3trjmyK4X jI45BzBLnNf9dGZi4KZeM++rWLSlHx7auqdfQADEGrOpB0UbESiPz4iN1Cb4piJ93UTj+EX0rt4f3 NgGuRplXt+xf35AXS8E8jYAdSqSwqxCbEkMSlPRkr+uiEKhpTyDXOP9JUL2qgYWTe9ILxCBA8i5u3 Ak+GZlfPG/DZ8AqtNAV3jXAfuJNbl8pEiULl0FskHa4mPD6GSkFS9oXpp9SdUrBKAyKMnqDoZXEpT Jqhqps/sc7hoFiBCD1qe6w==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p64a6-00037n-6G; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 01:52:30 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:52:30 +0200 Message-Id: <83r0wzkfgx.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Len Trigg In-Reply-To: (message from Len Trigg on Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:48:54 +1300) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Len Trigg > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:48:54 +1300 > Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org, dann@ics.uci.edu > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 22:10, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other modified-key escapes" on > > https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like: > > (3 32 [?\M-\s]) > > to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, > > If that fixes the problem, we could install it. > > I tried this out and it does fix the issue for me. OK, will install that soon. > BTW, have you tried to replicate the issue yourself? I can't: I don't have access to a system with such a terminal emulator. > There's nothing wrong with solving this one problem at a time, right? > Especially since we don't seem to have complaints about other > sequences. > > I suppose so, I'm just a little wary of fixing like this without understanding why it only seems to be an issue now > or whether other guards are needed. For example, the commit log for this area shows Dan Nicolaescu adding > more bindings in c0658ad46e4928ecdf6a14904073dc8a2fcfe862 and also bumping the xterm version > number that is checked against, so he is probably knowledgeable about how this works. (I've tried to add him > to the CC list using the email address in that commit) Yes, thanks. Dan, if you have time to look into this and advise, please do. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Dec 16 02:40:28 2022 Received: (at 60077) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Dec 2022 07:40:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47742 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p65KT-0005Mq-0h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:40:28 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47062) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p65KO-0005Mg-CO for 60077@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:40:23 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p65KF-0008Lx-O6; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:40:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=v6Wsr+DR3fwvzqwv9BVanp4BDiJiIDRogMynBLDKCJU=; b=iDyekCPnhkTh Gi7Xbwt4Qc9JPb8TDgESESBBZiCglDz7h30eguD8fNsgPt9u0HflmA7bnpNlNWWLyfiHYY7bX5HzU b3IVBcsLS4JSRSozP4G5EDlSfzLL9ZihVsxCuBkDSECgbxApVhELEVVa1eTmk6yuvc0aQFE27oKJv OGCIk/g6+ko9xskPTSzBGDCUwtLXwAz0rdARvLnfasb4WWFcaTrWA806IgwdqND/YxTkP5D9Nd6AC dNd0wcMpHtdx6F3sjmg8anSQQFJujSQ9wkxoLTT25w3rRYAKXBHt1J+YmnR07a8s2Eu6ujMg3ZM7y L2H7UE4H2xFwOVWjWDdMmQ==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p65K8-0004MH-6h; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:40:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 09:40:04 +0200 Message-Id: <83len7kd9n.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: lenbok@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <83r0wzkfgx.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:52:30 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0wzkfgx.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077 Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, 60077@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, 60077@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:52:30 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > Yes, thanks. Dan, if you have time to look into this and advise, > please do. And the message bounced from Dan's last known address, so I guess we are on our own here. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Dec 16 11:04:27 2022 Received: (at 60077-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Dec 2022 16:04:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50190 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p6DCE-0001Gj-R3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 11:04:27 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59820) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p6DCC-0001Gd-7y for 60077-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 11:04:25 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p6DC6-0003E3-Kx; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 11:04:18 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=vgMveSFtn4s4LEe1lQ/A6enOxz95Zv/uDFvlP4dg8KQ=; b=LtptRPDpoUqK Cb9f7oSO0HbfMCM2NVuLIeXmKlAyUNPHFvxeMXd3pjcSUgi+VNTmw9dRXug1OiUyPig9z1IfF5vkO EKn1wlFpgbGx2sA/kUIZzi0Q11ikKbK8+4TtzmhEeOBBR/XfAzS50iSCinw12wv92aqLu9ioUWLpo ew8SjLkg7Oz2+626Zf/8E45xSc6debv96BRmpbnZZz8KfHcjF+q2weEOEUw3r+5Q6J8j9X6/Vx6Uz Q3hHAknBM77t5WNCQlGQzKjP/c1PzmUawa9DOdVL5Ej+DxxstlJdDkZY5r1kEQynZypPR63tITRvS ihCiNBpCrk9xlhqGpPxj0Q==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p6DBv-0007Hh-1A; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 11:04:18 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 18:04:09 +0200 Message-Id: <835yebjpxi.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: lenbok@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <83r0wzkfgx.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:52:30 +0200) Subject: Re: bug#60077: 29.0.60; Is xterm modifyOtherKeys support broken? References: <831qp1mamr.fsf@gnu.org> <83ilidkp68.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0wzkfgx.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 60077-done Cc: 60077-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Cc: dann@ics.uci.edu, 60077@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:52:30 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > > From: Len Trigg > > Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:48:54 +1300 > > Cc: 60077@debbugs.gnu.org, dann@ics.uci.edu > > > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 22:10, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > And my wild speculation from looking at the example table "Other modified-key escapes" on > > > https://invisible-island.net/xterm/modified-keys-us-pc105.html is that emacs would need an entry like: > > > (3 32 [?\M-\s]) > > > to handle the modifyOtherKeys encoding of "\E[27;3;32~" for M-SPC, > > > > If that fixes the problem, we could install it. > > > > I tried this out and it does fix the issue for me. > > OK, will install that soon. Now done on the emacs-29 branch, and closing the bug. Thanks. From unknown Sun Jun 15 08:33:41 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 12:24:09 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator