From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Keeping Subject: Re: no luck with colors for branch names in gitk yet Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 23:28:49 +0000 Message-ID: <20160205232849.GJ29880@serenity.lan> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Philip Oakley , git@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras To: Britton Kerin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 06 00:36:21 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aRpvJ-00007x-BX for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 00:36:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750915AbcBEXgN (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2016 18:36:13 -0500 Received: from mta1-jackal.aluminati.org ([72.9.247.211]:54820 "EHLO jackal.aluminati.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765AbcBEXgL (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2016 18:36:11 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 426 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:36:11 EST Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jackal.aluminati.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013FB866006; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 23:29:05 +0000 (GMT) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at serval.aluminati.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-9999 required=6.31 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_50=0.8, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no Received: from jackal.aluminati.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (jackal.aluminati.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id PNq1jtHOs0YV; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 23:29:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from serenity.lan (banza.aluminati.org [10.0.7.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jackal.aluminati.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07AD3CDA5A6; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 23:28:51 +0000 (GMT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:29:26PM -0900, Britton Kerin wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Philip Oakley wrote: > > From: "Britton Kerin" > >> > >> Someone suggested using color.branch.upstream, I tried like this and > >> variants > >> > >> [color "branch"] > >> local = red bold > >> upstream = red bold > >> > >> Doesn't seem to matter what I put in for upstream, including invalid > >> colors, gitk just ignores it and does the dark green for local > >> branches > >> -- > > > > Alternate, try > > https://github.com/oumu/mintty-color-schemes/blob/master/base16-mintty/base16-default.minttyrc > > (or any of the other colour schemes) and copy them into your .minttyrc file > > (works for me on g4w : git version 2.7.0.windows.1 ) > > I'm on linux so I think mintty is not an option. Also, I'm a little > surprised in affects the rendering of branch tags in gitk, I would > have thought that would be an X or window system thing. I think Philip missed that you were talking about gitk. It seems that the problem comes from updating to Tcl/Tk 7.6, which makes green darker as described in commit 66db14c (gitk: Color name update, 2015-10-25) and by TIP #403 [1]. However, it seems that gitk won't actually use the updated colour if you have an existing ~/.gitk file. You can just replace "green" with "lime" in that file to get the new defaults, but I wonder if we should force that for users who already have the previous defaults saved. [1] http://www.tcl.tk/cgi-bin/tct/tip/403.html