[Grml-devel] Discussion: Add ncurses-term to GRMLBASE or only GRML_FULL

[Michael Prokop]

* Axel Beckert [Thu Dec 13, 2012 at 03:49:55PM +0100]:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 02:29:43PM +0100, Markus bionix Ulrich wrote:
> > we have the bts issue 1220 [1] and mika said to the topic, that maybe
> > it's better to add the package ncurses-term to GRMLBASE instead to
> > GRML_FULL.
> [...]
> > What is your opinion to the topic?

> My first thought was "Oh, yes, sure! I explicitly install that on all
> my boxes, too." But when I thought about why I install it on all my
> boxes, I noticed that this may be suboptimal for a live CD:

> screen has some interesting behaviour depending on where ncurses-terms
> is installed or not. See
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694178#10 for the
> details.

> Summary: If screen is started on the e.g. console (TERM=linux) of a
> box with ncurses-terms installed (contains definitions for
> screen.linux), it will notice the availability of screen.$TERM
> definitions and use them. It just uses "screen" otherwise.

> If you then SSH from inside the screen to another box where
> ncurses-term isn't installed, the remote box won't know about the used
> $TERM (screen.linux) and will argue about it.

> So you can't run into that issue at all if ncurses-terms is not
> installed on the machine where you start SSH inside a screen session.

> In that light, I'm not sure if that would add more value than it would
> cause issues.

Thanks for providing this useful information, Axel!
So can we conclude that we don't want to add ncurses-terms to any
GRML* software package fail (AKA "don't ship it therefore" :))?

regards,
-mika-
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ml.grml.org/pipermail/grml-devel/attachments/20121217/7f6945d4/attachment.pgp>