I've just upgraded to Fedora 8 (from Fedora 7) and once again I have to disable the ls alias that automatically gives coloured directory listings.
I really can't understand how the default values can work on any normal terminal! :-)
The colours that I *can* read OK are the (bright?) blue used for directories and the (bright?) magenta used for graphics files. However I *can't* really read bright green (it's a .doc file in my case) nor (even worse) bright cyan which is used for symbolic links.
On a white (well actually a very pale grey in my case, grey90 I think) background few of the bright colours work well at all so why does the default use them, surely most people use a light background nowadays. Anyway from a Google search it seems that the defaults work even less well on a dark background.
Does anyone have a more sensible set of colours that they could share? I don't think I want/need any of the file type colouring but colours for directories, symbolic links (especially broken ones) and a few other things might be useful.
If not I think I'll go and design my own.
hi,
On 06/03/2008, Chris G cl@isbd.net wrote:
I really can't understand how the default values can work on any normal terminal! :-)
Normal is black background. Don't believe me? Look at tty1 :)
On a white (well actually a very pale grey in my case, grey90 I think) background few of the bright colours work well at all so why does the default use them, surely most people use a light background nowadays.
What makes you think that most people use white background?
I don't think I want/need any of the file type colouring but colours for directories, symbolic links (especially broken ones) and a few other things might be useful.
I think there's some file that you can edit to change the colours, maybe in /etc somewhere.
Good luck,
-Srdj
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:11:03PM +0000, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
hi,
On 06/03/2008, Chris G cl@isbd.net wrote:
I really can't understand how the default values can work on any normal terminal! :-)
Normal is black background. Don't believe me? Look at tty1 :)
On a white (well actually a very pale grey in my case, grey90 I think) background few of the bright colours work well at all so why does the default use them, surely most people use a light background nowadays.
What makes you think that most people use white background?
Well even if they don't just do a Google search for LS_COLORS and you'll find lots of people complaining about them not working well on dark backgrounds. :-)
I don't think I want/need any of the file type colouring but colours for directories, symbolic links (especially broken ones) and a few other things might be useful.
I think there's some file that you can edit to change the colours, maybe in /etc somewhere.
There's a utility, of sorts, called dircolors. I was just hoping someone else might have done some of the work for me.
Hi,
On 06/03/2008, Chris G cl@isbd.net wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:11:03PM +0000, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
On 06/03/2008, Chris G cl@isbd.net wrote:
Well even if they don't just do a Google search for LS_COLORS and you'll find lots of people complaining about them not working well on dark backgrounds. :-)
A very quick look shows that the dark blue on the black background is a bad choice. I would agree to a point, but here at work the blue is nice.
There's a utility, of sorts, called dircolors. I was just hoping someone else might have done some of the work for me.
dircolors --print-database gives you a key to the options and the colours. I guess you just pick your new colours, add them to your shell rc file (globally or in your home area) and away you go.
-Srdj
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 15:11 +0000, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
Normal is black background. Don't believe me? Look at tty1 :)
I was thinking that. The first thing I do to any terminal application is set it up for a black background, preferably with green text (unless showing the mentioned dir colours or syntax highlighting)
It would I imagine be hard to come up with a set of colours that work equally well on white backgrounds as well as they do on black. Given that tty1 has a black background and most x term type apps seem to default to white this presents a bit of a problem.
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 10:53:51PM +0000, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 15:11 +0000, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
Normal is black background. Don't believe me? Look at tty1 :)
I was thinking that. The first thing I do to any terminal application is set it up for a black background, preferably with green text (unless showing the mentioned dir colours or syntax highlighting)
It would I imagine be hard to come up with a set of colours that work equally well on white backgrounds as well as they do on black. Given that tty1 has a black background and most x term type apps seem to default to white this presents a bit of a problem.
On the other hand it wouldn't be too difficult to offer a pair of default colour schemes.
I've actually been looking at the default scheme in a gdm/gnome desktop instead of my default fvwm2 one and on the gnome desktop it's acceptable. The 'bright' colours aren't actually so bright as they are using fvwm2 and so they work OK on a white/light background. Bright cyan on my fvwm2 terminal windows is unreadable but just looks like bold on gnome.
-
Chris G -
Srdjan Todorovic -
Wayne Stallwood