Micro uses foot's `bright7` color instead of `default` listed in color scheme file about micro

[237dmitry]

Is the environment variable MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1 set?

[dustdfg]

MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1

No. I just tried to enable it and it doesn't have any influence... And it also doesn't affect gnome-terminal that works without this bug

[niten94]

I do not know much about terminals but I think another color was used because 24-bit color was disabled. The 8th color (regular7 in foot) is usually white in terminal themes so it will probably be a color that looks like the default one if not set.

24-bit color was probably disabled because foot is not in the terminfo database in micro, but I think other programs usually use the system database. There is an isuse about the terminfo database being included: #2543

I tried reading "TRUECOLOR" section in the manpage of foot and I do not know if the terminfo entries have to be used, but I think it is related. 24-bit colors is just disabled if MICRO_TRUECOLOR is not 1 so nothing would change when setting it but I think it will probably be enabled when setting TERM environment variable with xterm-truecolor:

micro/internal/screen/screen.go

Lines 144 to 149 in 2d82362

	// Should we enable true color?
	truecolor := os.Getenv("MICRO_TRUECOLOR") == "1"
	if !truecolor {
	os.Setenv("TCELL_TRUECOLOR", "disable")
	}

[dustdfg]

So you mean to try: MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1 with TERM=xterm-truecolor? I just tried it and it didn't help. Tell you more, COLORTERM=truecolor was at the same time

[dustdfg]

But i just found one fun thing. TERM=xterm-truecolor as like TERM=xterm-256color gives bug but TERM=xterm-color works normally.

EDIT: it looked like it is without bug. Just because I opened plain micro and saw white as expected... What is wrong? Idk I can say that colors are loosed but not more before further research

P.S Happy New Year

[niten94]

Sorry, I realized there is probably something wrong with what I thought about MICRO_TRUECOLOR but it is late here so I cannot check again and explain properly at this time. I think it would at least be surprising if 24-bit color is enabled when TERM is xterm-color even though MICRO_TRUECOLOR is not 1, but I still have not checked.
Happy new year also.

[niten94]

No, I was only thinking about trying to run with TERM=xterm-truecolor but I realized MICRO_TRUECOLOR has to be 1. I was also wrong about terminfo.

I did not say that I thought the included terminfo database only is used, but entries in files are also used so the entries of foot are used. I do not think TERM usually has to be changed because COLORTERM (not manually set) only is probably checked when it is being checked if 24-bit color is supported.

MICRO_TRUECOLOR has to be 1 when enabling it but I do not know why it was disabled when you set it and I think it is weird. I tried looking at the manpage of foot and I think TERM can tried being set as foot-direct so that it will be enabled.

I have not used Wayland before so I tried copying the terminfo entry of foot in Debian 12 and using a terminal emulator where 24-bit color is enabled, but it was enabled when MICRO_TRUECOLOR is 1 and TERM is foot. I used another terminal emulator so it was just bugged when TERM is foot-direct.

I think this script can be used when testing and changing TERM. MICRO_TRUECOLOR is set as 1 when arguments are passed.

#!/bin/sh
set -u -e

[ $# -gt 0 ] && export MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1
echo "COLORTERM ${COLORTERM:--} MICRO_TRUECOLOR ${MICRO_TRUECOLOR:--}"

# opening micro takes a while when using other terminal emulators and
# TERM is foot-direct, not tested
for t in xterm xterm-color xterm-256color xterm-truecolor foot; do
    printf %s $t
    read _
    TERM=$t micro -colorscheme monokai
done

This is what it was like when I used the terminal emulator I was using:
https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/assets/127052329/0e285b64-d3cc-45fb-a8d9-4008c3586af3

I apologize that what I have said was confusing and that I was not able to answer properly.

[niten94]

I tried testing using foot and GNOME Terminal in Debian 12 but 24-bit color was only enabled when I set MICRO_TRUECOLOR as 1 and ran micro even if I did not do something else. I do not know how did you set it but I think the variable was not exported when running micro probably because MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1 only was entered in a line when you were setting it in the shell.

The variable can be set like this when running micro:

MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1 micro
micro # running again, variable is not set

The variable can also be set and exported in another line like this so that it will be set when it is not set in a command:

export MICRO_TRUECOLOR=1
micro

[dustdfg]

You are right it wasn't exported. My habit is to put ; between commands usually gives me problems with variable exporting. It usually happens like export ; command. "Hmm it didn't work I should try two lines form (without export). Hmm it also didn't work so the variable doesn't work."

Foot works as expected when the MICRO_TRUECOLOR is 1 but it is still strange that it doesn't work without it because gnome terminal works normally

[niten94]

24-bit color is disabled when MICRO_TRUECOLOR is not 1 even when using GNOME Terminal but the colors in monokai in micro and the default color scheme in GNOME Terminal (Tango) are similar so it can look like it is enabled. I used LMDE 6 when testing but packages are based on the packages in Debian 12 so I think there is at least not much differences.

It can be seen in this video that the colors are different when MICRO_TRUECOLOR is not 1:

simplescreenrecorder-2024-02-04_21.19.45.mp4

[dustdfg]

Yeah. It is correct. I just changed the color in gnome terminal and so that micro uses it as like in foot. Thanks!