[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-05 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
oops, sorry that wasn't a fair comparison - different directory name! ** Attachment added: "konsoletest.png" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/37442184/konsoletest.png -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug notification because you are a member of

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-05 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
this is the same test, using konsole. It's a bit more readable than the gnome-terminal example (hance the observation that gnome-terminal has a colour rendering problem (bug raised)), but it's still quite hard to read, compared to all the other colours that are normally seen on a text screen. **

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-05 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
just so we're all on the same page - this is how it looks on my computer. I believe I have correct colour vision - and I can barely make out the word "test" on this image at its normal size (as it opens). ** Attachment added: "an example of the problem" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/37441918/

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-05 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
re-reading this, and just thinking from a basic usability point of view, blue and green are very close together in visual terms - the most common form of colour-blindness is blue/green, which makes them much harder to distinguish for a lot of people. Could you consider picking a pair of colours wh

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-04 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
per suggestion in above, raised upstream to gnome-terminal https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606064 ** Bug watch added: GNOME Bug Tracker #606064 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606064 -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bu

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-04 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-terminal/+bug/502888 -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2010-01-04 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
Surprised and disappointed at this outcome - everyone agrees it's hard to read for most people. This is a basic accessibility bug - anyone with even mildly worse eyesight than ours is going to find it even harder to read! Contrary to what was suggested, o+w isn't *necessarily* a Bad Thing, so I s

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-30 Thread C de-Avillez
For the record, this is the email thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2009-12/msg00292.html -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-30 Thread C de-Avillez
As such, closing WONTFIX. If there is a problem, it is either local to the colour palette in use, or on the terminal emulator in use. -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-30 Thread C de-Avillez
Ends up this is *not* an issue on Coreutils (which I also considered, but failed to fully test). This is the response I received: "I don't see the problem: it's readable for me when using roxterm as my terminal emulator. Here's what I did: $ mkdir other-writable $ chmod o+w other-writabl

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-30 Thread C de-Avillez
I have emailed bug-coreut...@gnu.org about it, and will add the thread link as soon as it pops in. Marking as Triaged/Low ** Also affects: coreutils Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: coreutils (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Triaged -- bad colour on ls listing http

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-30 Thread C de-Avillez
I can confirm this, but the colour is actually set by having OTHERS writable. If you chmod 757 a directory, it will be printed as blue over green as stated. And yes, it is really difficult to read, at least for me. ** Changed in: coreutils (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Low ** Changed in:

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-18 Thread Steve McGrath
This would be an issue with dircolors, which is part of coreutils. I've reassigned this to the correct package for you. Thanks for reporting! ** Package changed: nautilus (Ubuntu) => coreutils (Ubuntu) -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug noti

[Bug 498212] Re: bad colour on ls listing

2009-12-18 Thread Andy Stanford-Clark
sorry - this is an "ls" bug, not nautilus - when I did "report another bug" it defaulted to where I'd raised the previous bug. -- bad colour on ls listing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/498212 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubun