From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C6520798 for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:30:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751439AbdAML36 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 06:29:58 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f195.google.com ([209.85.192.195]:34800 "EHLO mail-pf0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751406AbdAML35 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 06:29:57 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-f195.google.com with SMTP id y143so8120664pfb.1 for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 03:29:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=531mjx5qG3jf/rRB75ZQdr8kRbL9WFlKHs/Wm/itHSs=; b=vhTAOxjXl7aw+n+ASD35LSne8YAlQm0zpsuagWcdkHyzGBuCD7JWHpMvzBO2pHBeGr 0Hs4JIKh/g5Fw+ZOdceiWNXXOm40sORhFZ3a0DDNPEVVyy0j0NYz+XKavd6YSTqSr4Gi YFVIlYP6Ok5AJYnCyONnR1vJLmRibCg4jaRFdW4nCNf8nvH+f9eZM7Gh94T3we76mdOG a41wVHbnT+zUQH0sLkbLO8CUVuxeHCG63i9VQTLIhCtcAnZmrel78OPpLA0fpyZ0lA7R MQZH7/I9X0ELudiDBgG6ihGudYDkH35LKLmzd+DMahnXPgGyA4cYFzJntdFhTdbLIAc8 au5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=531mjx5qG3jf/rRB75ZQdr8kRbL9WFlKHs/Wm/itHSs=; b=CigIJEQSBXPqjg67XaLJh5UMyIsyVafO+vrV7wUZZyjdiZKZc971L490koH0P4otHM LYAE7ceVnzgCUjicMY8BHuHY7mTet2kv+FAQMASwfgtN+wZvaP/VRAVHTTikqpWL5WSq QQJ6MQv06VU18ZmWOX+A3aGupu7ksBtkvr5rdc5I9dhMuR2Jsdgcm7O6B79v8lVH9eLi lsGNLFh7tOigVkw+NgN9rhw40wbEWCX5TFEi4SYI4a9SYW/lLSXhCR3nON556ukOTsXi VoUv1g498otEczQCQMxN9d0ME9WYrwTKQWtimjsDi45U+A6LnmD1l2chWJ0uRai8Qyme y1LA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKgVrlhaLhZ4VkI85LVmVksYf6Qn45WfIQcMp7Hzefzq9Fp8v8bpMS2yPm5yLbcow== X-Received: by 10.99.53.195 with SMTP id c186mr23659359pga.24.1484306448537; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 03:20:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmail.com (50-1-201-252.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com. [50.1.201.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l3sm28771305pgc.41.2017.01.13.03.20.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 13 Jan 2017 03:20:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 03:20:43 -0800 From: David Aguilar To: Stefan Beller Cc: Andrew Janke , Paul Mackerras , "git@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: gitk: "lime" color incompatible with older Tk versions Message-ID: <20170113112043.j7nowdilolswyk2k@gmail.com> References: <03babaa1-9011-0010-c4b3-6cad8109d3ab@apjanke.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161126 (1.7.1) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:20:43AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > + Paul Mackerras, who maintains gitk > > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Andrew Janke wrote: > > Hi, git folks, > > > > I'm having trouble running gitk on Mac OS X 10.9.5. The gitk program uses > > the color "lime", which is not present in older versions of Tk, apparently > > including the Tk 8.5 which ships with 10.9. Ping.. it would be nice to get this patch applied. I can verify that gitk on Mac OS X 10.11 also has this problem. gitk is usually pretty good about backwards-compatibility. > > This compatibility problem was noted before back in 2012, in > > http://www.mail-archive.com/git%40vger.kernel.org/msg14496.html. > > > > Would you consider switching from lime to a hex value color, for > > compatibility with users of older versions of Tk? A patch to do so is below; > > only the file gitk-git/gitk needs to be changed. I can recreate and resend this patch if needed; it's simply: :%s/lime/"#99FF00"/g Would a re-roll of this patch be accepted, or is it not worth bothering? Google for "gitk lime" to get a taste for some of the fallout caused by this problem. The fact that multiple pages, with different OS's, have examples of users stumbling over this change is a good hint that it's worth fixing. Thoughts? -- David