On 24-Mar-00, 03:22 (CST), Peter Cordes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Because that's what xterms do (by default) on every other single X > > implementation ever done? (Ok, that's probably an exageration...but not > > completely misleading, either.) > > Is that enough of a reason to not change it? Does it break any programs > specifically?
It doesn't break programs, particularly, but it breaks configurations -- people whove changed only the foreground or background, or people who've set up other program's coloring to work on a black-on-white xterm. > (I assume you have a nice DIRCOLORS setting that fixes that, though.) No, I think colored ls is the spawn of the devil. :-) (Actually I find colored ls a huge distraction, and all the information I need is provided by the '-F' option of ls) > > (I wonder if the preference for light-on-dark vs dark-on-light depends > > on ambient light conditions?) > > I usually like to work in a relatively dark room. I think I'm nocturnal or > something (looks at clock... :( And I tend to work in well lit rooms, even at night -- so from our amazing sample of two, there is a correlation! [*big snip*] You've got a lot of valid points; I agree that black-on-white xterms do glare a little, although I've never had a real problem with them (when I use other people's systems, I hardly ever mess with the colors, even for a few days of work.) But the current defaults are defensible: it's the "world-wide X standard default". Anything else amounts to personal preference and will promote a continuous stream of bug reports and complaints. Steve -- Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)