From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-in-1.gedalya.net (mail.gedalya.net [170.39.119.235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAD6E125AC for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 15:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.39.119.235 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716477477; cv=none; b=RSxVyMZLCEjrjWFLgrQW0VY8ltCurDOfIpJNLUMmSCJabMzGe3ZrgroxInWdz1u6g4hXyuCL2Zcxq2tUcKc9uLaITArWooCuqYvuXvXNz8D8eB5/zhV1rnCZOGgt+W2mssif4iUeacruasZk8jUYfq9Dva0OCqBVZiEPNYuaRUc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716477477; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dw0GRxDMpwNNnRAXQSVKch6Bufz5DNxd7l8Af3GWA20=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Uy/oOThHCB8Y5mV2CVG8W0DBmAaa+bhCfXxJYCgYQBYsqkist2CeayND3xGVsBik9yTY1YeaNfBcm961mPsU5MnP+JyA+bVbxQaPR9VVlensqxOQy/eHRJ3Sjx4ujXcFS8QvigkQ6AnxtuYuwZbnjEUdA+6SJJiyAaki4AlYJSA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=gedalya.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gedalya.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gedalya.net header.i=@gedalya.net header.b=AlnkmY12; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.39.119.235 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=gedalya.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gedalya.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gedalya.net header.i=@gedalya.net header.b="AlnkmY12" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gedalya.net ; s=rsa1; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=bEpX6LA+YlkrHvAzQ0I4cUTviWGDbs3dSlUJTOEl7Z4=; b=AlnkmY12r0hw/7O6XQ6bcbnBrZ PjXMsMueyEiZ2q4rz9SOcYYFJVHWhM1rD6/zU3biDPDjmZ7X6kET0cFcCl4iUkrY7Uj0AUK0DSkln bV66cXOm6wwwwZ65Ll7IcTTGcr5MvZt5C17ssLQLzOm8s1JJu+0a+wEE5gx1aR8fmfk+kP0MiarA3 kvjrZRpHVAoDDa27gmIL9CJlEw+lHjfVNt2vICeJtBwBJ6etCMMlaVAmLby4TvyESvs+qB9WAeJEC Iy+J7X6iDafVvWnOYXPhW8gfhjzaiJi/sE4d42dVlkyQBhMjNOHNvt8UxZoqjcefjK9RSYZHsd2RC KAzTTR0A==; Received: from [192.168.9.176] by smtp-in-1.gedalya.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1sAACS-000gPz-1d; Thu, 23 May 2024 15:17:48 +0000 Message-ID: <8a1402f2-04bb-475f-a496-059470ce9bbd@gedalya.net> Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 23:17:44 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: iproute2: color output should assume dark background To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Dragan Simic , Sirius , netdev@vger.kernel.org References: <173e0ec8-583a-4d5a-931f-81d08e43fe2b@gedalya.net> <96b17bae-47f7-4b2d-8874-7fb89ecc052a@gedalya.net> <449db665-0285-4283-972f-1b6d5e6e71a1@gedalya.net> <7d67d9e72974472cc61dba6d8bdaf79a@manjaro.org> <1d0a0772-8b9a-48d6-a0f1-4b58abe62f5e@gedalya.net> <94d43b6d-74ae-4544-b443-32d8da044b75@gedalya.net> <20240523075904.16f3599b@hermes.local> Content-Language: en-US From: Gedalya In-Reply-To: <20240523075904.16f3599b@hermes.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/23/24 10:59 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Fits perfect with "what color for the bike shed" I'd love it if someone actually commented on my patch. Currently, iproute2 does produce colored output when COLORFGBG is unset. If that remains unchanged:         It selects a certain palette. Does everyone here think that keeping the current selection best serves the majority of users? It's a simple question. It seems to me that it should revolve around a guesstimation of what background colors people are using. Or maybe I'm wrong. No one is arguing here about what colors anyone _should_ be using. I also think it's misguided to regard an issue of unreadable output as trivial. Using a black background is something you can choose away from, except in an emergency, and not so much on vt. And navy blue on black is just hard to read. Poor contrast. If you can read that easier than others then fine, good for you, but this is about usability, it has literally nothing to do with personal taste. ------- Alternative approaches: default to light bg, but select dark bg when TERM=linux (linux vt), I'd be happy to write the patch. I'd like to try to alter the colors as suggested by Sirius, and if everyone agrees I'd like to also stick to defaulting to dark bg if not indicated otherwise.