Re: x86 console size

[Valery Ushakov <uwe%stderr.spb.ru@localhost>]

On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 20:50:07 +0000, RVP wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Jun 2022, Valery Ushakov wrote:
> 
> > Can't we just fix the font name in wsfont/bold16x32.h to be
> > Boldface-16x32? :) Avoids confusion in wsfontload -l output too.
> 
> Yes! I would prefer that.

Any objections to this from others?  We have that font included into
several kernels but I guess its primary use is to have a large'ish
font for automatic font selection to use for higher-res displays.
I.e. people probably don't have it in their wscons.conf, so renaming
it shouldn't break things too much for people.


> > PS: would be nice to have a version of echo that shqoute(3) its
> > arguments to use for DOIT too.
> 
> This, below, do? (I did the same with printf(1)--"%q", but I was just
> chucking away fieldwidth and precesion there, so echo it is.):

Sorry, I was sloppy in my wording, I didn't mean echo(1), just *some*
echo-like thing (printf, vis, ...).  vis already supports VIS_SHELL
&c, but its output mostly makes me want to claw my eyes out, and not
in a good way.

Since %q is already in bash and zsh there's an argument to be made
that it's the way to go, if only to avoid gratuitous divergence.
Adding flags to echo(1) is probably not the best idea in any case.
ISTR, kre@ commented on that bit of history some time in the past on
one of the lists.

shquote(3) is not intended for human consumption, so we might also
want to think about a pretty-printing version (may be as new vis(3)
flag?)  that tries to DTRT and produce more human-friendly output.  I
think our shell's set -x (that is intended for humans) already has the
code.


-uwe