Talk:GNOME Terminal

C/C++ Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C and C++ topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++ articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article falls within the scope of C.

Linux Low‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Mid-importance).

a nearly identical feature set

If it's "similar" to xterm, and implements "many, but not all" of the escape sequences, in what sense would it be "nearly identical"? Tedickey (talk) 14:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

partly based on

Sounds rather obscure. The reader might benefit by a clear exposition. Looking for a definition, the term appears to apply to products which incorporate another product, and is not applicable to those which imitate another. To keep the "based on", a reliable source is needed. TEDickey (talk) 11:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put it there based on the (already referenced) discussion at xterm's web page, largely accusing GNOME Terminal for being badly written, with chunks of code incorporated from xterm without notice. I thought this was better than the earlier "similar products" approach, as I feel xterm and the graphical terminal emulators are very different in goals and functionality (the similarity being that both are X terminal emulators claiming to emulate a VT102).

But yes. GNOME Terminal is mostly based on other products, so this ought to be rewritten. I do not know much about it and I am very frustrated about the Gnome documentation, so I am not sure I will be able to write anything good.

--LPfi (talk) 13:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks - "emulates" seems to fit consensus TEDickey (talk) 00:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

major changes

I was required to write a Wikipedia article for a class, so I filled out this stub. Hope this is OK. Cvondrick (talk) 01:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Compatibility and what is deleted

The sentence about whether the computer can delete the character before or after the cursor is "accurate" (though it doesn't belong in that paragraph). The following "consequently" is inaccurate, since the use made of the delete/backspace character is unrelated to the preceding sentence. TEDickey (talk) 10:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I fixed the consequently. I left the statement about deleting because I'm not sure where else to put it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvondrick (talk • contribs) 17:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's still confused. On a typical keyboard, there are two things called "delete". One is an ASCII character (127), which is (originally implemented in rxvt) interchanged with ASCII 8 (backspace). Lots of people get confused, thinking that whatever the backspace key sends is backspace. Either way, those are assigned to the keyboard erase character with stty. In terminfo, that's "kbs". The other thing on the keyboard called "delete" is usually on the numeric or editing keypad. That sends 4 bytes (an escape sequence), e.g., "ESC [ 3 ~". The latter is what's normally used to delete the character at the cursor position. In terminfo, that's "kdch1". A few applications (such as GNU screen) will malfunction if kbs is assigned to the escape sequence. TEDickey (talk) 21:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

colored text and 256 colors

There's no source given for the statement that only a few programs can use the feature. Providing a single example doesn't help with that. TEDickey (talk) 10:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, how's it read now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvondrick (talk • contribs) 17:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I split the sentence - there's two things stated TEDickey (talk) 21:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That "by default" in the sentence about the 256-color palette is unclear. TEDickey (talk) 23:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Version numbers

Using the GNOME project's overall release gives misleading information. GNOME Terminal has its own versioning in source repository, which differs from the project's overall version numbers TEDickey (talk) 11:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Background

The tone and content of the "Background" section are promotional, with few reliable sources, e.g., "widely", "millions", the glossing over of the situation with the patch for transparency which is disowned by the developers, etc. About half of the content could be removed without removing anything which is encyclopedic. TEDickey (talk) 09:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on GNOME Terminal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150705221403/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g3LuRwDXLg to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g3LuRwDXLg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

original author?

A recent edit added "Zander Brown" as the original author of GNOME Console. The Git log for GNOME Terminal has Havoc Pennington (with Zander Brown first appearing 20 years later). Whether the sources are related or not has no WP:RS TEDickey (talk) 07:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, so I was a little confused as to why GNOME Console is under the GNOME Terminal article at all, Console may depend on VTE, but ultimately it is it's own project. Zander Brown originally started it as a project separate from GNOME, as you will see in their repository. It was then later brought under their umbrella in GNOME 42 due to it complying with GNOME Human Interface Guidelines more than Terminal does, source here, maybe it should be moved into its own article? Chronomly (talk) 03:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A separate topic would have to establish notability, which given the available sources seems to be a stretch. Just because something exists doesn't make it notable. TEDickey (talk) 08:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]