x-terminal-emulator does not appear to accept comand line args
bri...@aracnet.com
x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the command line + options to gnome-terminal.
if you try, for example,
x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
it doesn't seem to work.
bug ?
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110607220...@windy.deldotd.com
William Hopkins
> Hi all,
>
> x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the command line + options to gnome-terminal.
>
> if you try, for example,
>
> x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
>
> it doesn't seem to work.
Please provide the output of `ls -l /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator`
It is not necessarily a script, but a series of links which route to whatever terminal emulator you currently have configured.
--
Liam
bri...@aracnet.com
aha, I did this :
which x-terminal-emulator
and got this :
/usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
which is a script.
here's the output of ls -l /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 31 Jun 12 2009 /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator -> /usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110608072...@windy.deldotd.com
Camaleón
> x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the
> command line + options to gnome-terminal.
>
> if you try, for example,
>
> x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
>
> it doesn't seem to work.
>
> bug ?
Hum... here (lenny) neither works (gnomer-terminal launches but the
parameter is ignored).
But curiously "x-terminal-emulator --help" does work as expected, that
is, it displays the gnome-terminal help.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Tom Furie
> aha, I did this :
>
> which x-terminal-emulator
>
> and got this :
>
> /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
>
> which is a script.
Hmm, I would expect that to be a link to
/etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator.
Cheers,
Tom
--
The scene is dull. Tell him to put more life into his dying.
-- Samuel Goldwyn
William Hopkins
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 01:14:35 -0400
> William Hopkins <we.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 06/07/11 at 10:04pm, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the command line + options to gnome-terminal.
> > >
> > > if you try, for example,
> > >
> > > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> > >
> > > it doesn't seem to work.
> >
> > Please provide the output of `ls -l /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator`
> >
> > It is not necessarily a script, but a series of links which route to whatever terminal emulator you currently have configured.
> >
>
> aha, I did this :
>
> which x-terminal-emulator
>
> and got this :
>
> /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
>
> which is a script.
I doubt it. Try ls -l /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
you should see it is a link to /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator
which is then a link to a script. If you try to open any of them you'll just be opening the final one, which is a script (gnome-terminal.wrapper).
I don't have gnome-terminal installed to assist in troubleshooting, though.
--
Liam
bri...@aracnet.com
William Hopkins <we.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/08/11 at 07:26am, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 01:14:35 -0400
> > William Hopkins <we.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 06/07/11 at 10:04pm, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the command line + options to gnome-terminal.
> > > >
> > > > if you try, for example,
> > > >
> > > > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> > > >
> > > > it doesn't seem to work.
> > >
> > > Please provide the output of `ls -l /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator`
> > >
> > > It is not necessarily a script, but a series of links which route to whatever terminal emulator you currently have configured.
> > >
> >
> > aha, I did this :
> >
> > which x-terminal-emulator
> >
> > and got this :
> >
> > /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
> >
> > which is a script.
>
> I doubt it. Try ls -l /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
> you should see it is a link to /etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator
> which is then a link to a script. If you try to open any of them you'll just be opening the final one, which is a script (gnome-terminal.wrapper).
you are correct.
>
> I don't have gnome-terminal installed to assist in troubleshooting, though.
>
and the thing is - the script looks like it should work.
of course why there is a perl script instead of a bash script which simply revokes the terminal with the command line args is unclear to me.
Regardless, is this a bug ?
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110608183...@windy.deldotd.com
bri...@aracnet.com
Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:04:02 -0700, briand wrote:
>
> > x-terminal-emulator is a script stand-in that simply redirects the
> > command line + options to gnome-terminal.
> >
> > if you try, for example,
> >
> > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> >
> > it doesn't seem to work.
> >
> > bug ?
>
> Hum... here (lenny) neither works (gnomer-terminal launches but the
> parameter is ignored).
>
I verified again. gnome-terminal definitely uses the option and x-terminal-emulator definitely does not.
This is all kind of silly.
Why doesn't gnome-terminal have a preference setting for the size ?
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110608184...@windy.deldotd.com
Jon Dowland
> x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
>
> it doesn't seem to work.
x-terminal-emulator should implement the 'xterm' command-line arguments. xterm
doesn't accept --geometry=80x50:
Doesn't work:
x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
x-terminal-emulator -geometry=80x50
xterm --geometry=80x50
xterm -geometry=80x50
Does work:
x-terminal-emulator -geometry 80x50
xterm -geometry 80x50
--
Jon Dowland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110609092...@deckard.alcopop.org
Camaleón
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 14:59:03 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> > if you try, for example,
>> >
>> > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
>> >
>> > it doesn't seem to work.
>> >
>> > bug ?
>>
>> Hum... here (lenny) neither works (gnomer-terminal launches but the
>> parameter is ignored).
>>
>>
> I verified again. gnome-terminal definitely uses the option and
> x-terminal-emulator definitely does not.
>
> This is all kind of silly.
Hum... Jon is right. If we look at the perl script:
sm01@stt008:~$ grep geometry /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
elsif ($opt eq '-geometry')
push(@args, "--geometry=$arg");
The accepted argument is "-geometry" that is then converted into gnome-
terminal parlance ("--geometry=").
> Why doesn't gnome-terminal have a preference setting for the size ?
Follow Jon's suggestion, it works that way.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
bri...@aracnet.com
Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:40:03 -0700, briand wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 14:59:03 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> > if you try, for example,
> >> >
> >> > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> >> >
> >> > it doesn't seem to work.
> >> >
> >> > bug ?
> >>
> >> Hum... here (lenny) neither works (gnomer-terminal launches but the
> >> parameter is ignored).
> >>
> >>
> > I verified again. gnome-terminal definitely uses the option and
> > x-terminal-emulator definitely does not.
> >
> > This is all kind of silly.
>
> Hum... Jon is right. If we look at the perl script:
>
> sm01@stt008:~$ grep geometry /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
> elsif ($opt eq '-geometry')
> push(@args, "--geometry=$arg");
>
> The accepted argument is "-geometry" that is then converted into gnome-
> terminal parlance ("--geometry=").
>
There's still a bug, as the man page brings up the man page/options for gnome-terminal which uses "--geometry=".
And here's the really interesting part, the x-terminal-emulator script:
exec('gnome-terminal',@args);
So x-terminal-emulator is using -option, but telling you the whole time that it's going to execute gnome-terminal, for which the man page is different from what it's actually doing.
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110609072...@windy.deldotd.com
bri...@aracnet.com
Jon Dowland <jm...@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 10:04:02PM -0700, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> >
> > it doesn't seem to work.
>
> x-terminal-emulator should implement the 'xterm' command-line arguments. xterm
> doesn't accept --geometry=80x50:
>
> Doesn't work:
> x-terminal-emulator --geometry=80x50
> x-terminal-emulator -geometry=80x50
> xterm --geometry=80x50
> xterm -geometry=80x50
>
> Does work:
> x-terminal-emulator -geometry 80x50
> xterm -geometry 80x50
>
>
Thank you. That does work.
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110609072...@windy.deldotd.com
Camaleón
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 11:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> > I verified again. gnome-terminal definitely uses the option and
>> > x-terminal-emulator definitely does not.
>> >
>> > This is all kind of silly.
>>
>> Hum... Jon is right. If we look at the perl script:
>>
>> sm01@stt008:~$ grep geometry /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
>> elsif ($opt eq '-geometry')
>> push(@args, "--geometry=$arg");
>>
>> The accepted argument is "-geometry" that is then converted into gnome-
>> terminal parlance ("--geometry=").
>>
>>
> There's still a bug, as the man page brings up the man page/options for
> gnome-terminal which uses "--geometry=".
I think there is no bug... let' see:
sm01@stt008:~$ grep help /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
elsif ($opt eq '-h' || $opt eq '--help')
push(@args, '--help');
The "help" command from "x-terminal-emulator" accepts both arguments, "-
h" and "--help") ;-)
> And here's the really interesting part, the x-terminal-emulator script:
>
> exec('gnome-terminal',@args);
>
> So x-terminal-emulator is using -option, but telling you the whole time
> that it's going to execute gnome-terminal, for which the man page is
> different from what it's actually doing.
Hum... I'm afraid I don't follow you here :-?
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Camaleón
> On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:21:58 -0700, briand wrote:
>
>> There's still a bug, as the man page brings up the man page/options for
>> gnome-terminal which uses "--geometry=".
>
> I think there is no bug... let' see:
>
> sm01@stt008:~$ grep help /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
> elsif ($opt eq '-h' || $opt eq '--help')
> push(@args, '--help');
>
> The "help" command from "x-terminal-emulator" accepts both arguments, "-
> h" and "--help") ;-)
Err... after re-reading my response I think I've completely lost my
bearings (I don't know how in hell I linked the "--help" parameter with
the man page, sorry).
Anyway, I think "gnome-terminal" does not have to share the same
arguments than "x-terminal-emulator" so IMO, still no bug (yes, the man
page launched is the one of "gnome-terminal" but that's the expected
because in the end the perl script points to "gnome-terminal" binary or
whatever terminal the user has setup as default).
Dom
> On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:58:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:21:58 -0700, briand wrote:
>>
>>> There's still a bug, as the man page brings up the man page/options for
>>> gnome-terminal which uses "--geometry=".
>>
>> I think there is no bug... let' see:
>>
>> sm01@stt008:~$ grep help /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
>> elsif ($opt eq '-h' || $opt eq '--help')
>> push(@args, '--help');
>>
>> The "help" command from "x-terminal-emulator" accepts both arguments, "-
>> h" and "--help") ;-)
>
> Err... after re-reading my response I think I've completely lost my
> bearings (I don't know how in hell I linked the "--help" parameter with
> the man page, sorry).
>
> Anyway, I think "gnome-terminal" does not have to share the same
> arguments than "x-terminal-emulator" so IMO, still no bug (yes, the man
> page launched is the one of "gnome-terminal" but that's the expected
> because in the end the perl script points to "gnome-terminal" binary or
> whatever terminal the user has setup as default).
Actually the perl script in this case only points to "gnome-terminal",
nothing else.
"x-terminal-emulator" is a symlink to
"/etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator", which is a symlink to the perl
script "/usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper".
I think that as the wrapper is translating x-terminal options to
gnome-terminal equivalents, it shouldn't pass through "-h" or "--help",
but should display a basic usage page for the options that *it* accepts.
Therefore I consider this to be a bug (albeit minor in nature). I just
use the native gnome-terminal options anyway.
--
Dom
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Camaleón
> On 09/06/11 17:32, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:58:02 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:21:58 -0700, briand wrote:
>>>
>>>> There's still a bug, as the man page brings up the man page/options
>>>> for gnome-terminal which uses "--geometry=".
>>>
>>> I think there is no bug... let' see:
>>>
>>> sm01@stt008:~$ grep help /usr/bin/x-terminal-emulator
>>> elsif ($opt eq '-h' || $opt eq '--help')
>>> push(@args, '--help');
>>>
>>> The "help" command from "x-terminal-emulator" accepts both arguments,
>>> "- h" and "--help") ;-)
>>
>> Err... after re-reading my response I think I've completely lost my
>> bearings (I don't know how in hell I linked the "--help" parameter with
>> the man page, sorry).
>>
>> Anyway, I think "gnome-terminal" does not have to share the same
>> arguments than "x-terminal-emulator" so IMO, still no bug (yes, the man
>> page launched is the one of "gnome-terminal" but that's the expected
>> because in the end the perl script points to "gnome-terminal" binary or
>> whatever terminal the user has setup as default).
>
> Actually the perl script in this case only points to "gnome-terminal",
> nothing else.
Hum... it really points to the wrapper, not to "gnome-terminal" binary:
stt008:~# LANG=POSIX update-alternatives --display x-terminal-emulator
x-terminal-emulator - status is auto.
link currently points to /usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper
/usr/bin/xterm - priority 20
slave x-terminal-emulator.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/xterm.1.gz
/usr/bin/uxterm - priority 20
slave x-terminal-emulator.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/uxterm.1.gz
/usr/bin/koi8rxterm - priority 20
slave x-terminal-emulator.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/koi8rxterm.1.gz
/usr/bin/lxterm - priority 30
slave x-terminal-emulator.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/lxterm.1.gz
/usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper - priority 40
slave x-terminal-emulator.1.gz: /usr/share/man/man1/gnome-terminal.1.gz
Current `best' version is /usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper.
So the questions would be... what's the main role of the wrapper and why
"alternatives" is not pointing to the full binary instead?
> "x-terminal-emulator" is a symlink to
> "/etc/alternatives/x-terminal-emulator", which is a symlink to the perl
> script "/usr/bin/gnome-terminal.wrapper".
Yep.
> I think that as the wrapper is translating x-terminal options to
> gnome-terminal equivalents, it shouldn't pass through "-h" or "--help",
> but should display a basic usage page for the options that *it* accepts.
>
> Therefore I consider this to be a bug (albeit minor in nature). I just
> use the native gnome-terminal options anyway.
I don't know why but something tells me that there must be a good reason
for the wrapper behaving in that way, differently than the full binary.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
William Hopkins
Of course. gnome-terminal.wrapper is created solely for x-terminal-emulator use
by gnome-core/gnome-terminal maintainer Christian Marillat, and it tries to
present a set of options more like xterm, since x-terminal-emulator has decided
on xterm-style options. Emulating a single set of options where conflicts occur
is a policy decision, IIRC.
--
Liam
Camaleón
Ah... then it is intended so no bug here, right?
bri...@aracnet.com
Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:18:35 -0400, William Hopkins wrote:
>
> >
> > Of course. gnome-terminal.wrapper is created solely for
> > x-terminal-emulator use by gnome-core/gnome-terminal maintainer
> > Christian Marillat, and it tries to present a set of options more like
> > xterm, since x-terminal-emulator has decided on xterm-style options.
> > Emulating a single set of options where conflicts occur is a policy
> > decision, IIRC.
>
> Ah... then it is intended so no bug here, right?
>
But here's the problem
man x-terminal-emulator brings up the man page for gnome-terminal.
the gnome-terminal man page says that --geometry=GEOMETRY is a valid option.
However, --geometry=GEOMETRY is NOT a valid option for x-terminal-emulator.
So there's a bug - maybe the bug is that it pulls up the wrong man page.
Brian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110611081...@windy.deldotd.com
Camaleón
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:32:16 +0000 (UTC) Camaleón <noel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:18:35 -0400, William Hopkins wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Of course. gnome-terminal.wrapper is created solely for
>> > x-terminal-emulator use by gnome-core/gnome-terminal maintainer
>> > Christian Marillat, and it tries to present a set of options more
>> > like xterm, since x-terminal-emulator has decided on xterm-style
>> > options. Emulating a single set of options where conflicts occur is a
>> > policy decision, IIRC.
>>
>> Ah... then it is intended so no bug here, right?
>>
>>
> But here's the problem
>
> man x-terminal-emulator brings up the man page for gnome-terminal.
Well, "man x-terminal-emulator" opens the manual page for whatever
application you have configured with update-alternatives. It can point to
gnome-terminal.wrapper (a modified version of "gnome-terminal" compatible
with xterm arguments), to gnome-terminal itself, to xterm...
> the gnome-terminal man page says that --geometry=GEOMETRY is a valid
> option.
>
> However, --geometry=GEOMETRY is NOT a valid option for
> x-terminal-emulator.
>
> So there's a bug - maybe the bug is that it pulls up the wrong man page.
I still don't think there is a bug ;-)
As I see, "gnome-terminal" and "gnome-terminal.wrapper" are different
things aimed to different usages. But hey, if you think there is
something wrong or that can be improved, just go ahead with the bug
report.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Andrei POPESCU
>
> As I see, "gnome-terminal" and "gnome-terminal.wrapper" are different
> things aimed to different usages. But hey, if you think there is
> something wrong or that can be improved, just go ahead with the bug
> report.
I would file a minor bug to add something like this in the manpage:
----
Note: on Debian systems, if you start gnome-terminal via the
x-terminal-emulator symlink using the alternatives system, the long
options described in this manual will not work. Instead you will have to
use single-dash xterm-like options.
----
(feel free to (re)use the text above if you think it's useful ;)
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Camaleón
> On Sb, 11 iun 11, 15:40:36, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> As I see, "gnome-terminal" and "gnome-terminal.wrapper" are different
>> things aimed to different usages. But hey, if you think there is
>> something wrong or that can be improved, just go ahead with the bug
>> report.
>
> I would file a minor bug to add something like this in the manpage:
>
> ----
> Note: on Debian systems, if you start gnome-terminal via the
> x-terminal-emulator symlink using the alternatives system, the long
> options described in this manual will not work. Instead you will have to
> use single-dash xterm-like options.
> ----
>
> (feel free to (re)use the text above if you think it's useful ;)
Agree.
I would even expand the information on what the "gnome-terminal.wrapper"
is about and why a user may need it (use cases). Maybe it can deserve a
dedicated "man gnome-terminal.wrapper" so the author can be more verbose
here.
Jon Dowland
> I would file a minor bug to add something like this in the manpage:
I think a separate manpage — which describes the command-line options that
gnome-terminal.wrapper accepts — would be more appropriate, for the following
reasons:
• the gnome-terminal manpage comes from upstream (albeit translated from
another form). Therefore adding documentation that describes the wrapper
to this manpage is a divergence from upstream which has no chance of
being merged back. Every time the underlying manpage differs, the patch
will need to be rebased. Since the underlying manpage is generated,
rather than being hand-written, any change in the toolchain could result
in such a change.
• For those who never invoke the wrapper, it will cause the gnome-terminal
manpage to be more cluttered and possibly more confusing.
• Similarly, for those who do run the wrapper, the gnome-terminal manpage
includes many options which the wrapper does not accept. A cursory skim
or search through the manpage will show options which it does not accept.
--
Jon Dowland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110615123941.GA23323@pris
William Hopkins
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 07:47:09PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > I would file a minor bug to add something like this in the manpage:
>
> I think a separate manpage — which describes the command-line options that
> gnome-terminal.wrapper accepts — would be more appropriate, for the following
> reasons:
>
> • the gnome-terminal manpage comes from upstream (albeit translated from
> another form). Therefore adding documentation that describes the wrapper
> to this manpage is a divergence from upstream which has no chance of
> being merged back. Every time the underlying manpage differs, the patch
> will need to be rebased. Since the underlying manpage is generated,
> rather than being hand-written, any change in the toolchain could result
> in such a change.
>
> • For those who never invoke the wrapper, it will cause the gnome-terminal
> manpage to be more cluttered and possibly more confusing.
>
> • Similarly, for those who do run the wrapper, the gnome-terminal manpage
> includes many options which the wrapper does not accept. A cursory skim
> or search through the manpage will show options which it does not accept.
Given that the alternatives for x-terminal-emulator have decided to standardize
on xterm-like options, I think x-terminal-emulator needs it's own manpage
instead. Currently it is handled by alternatives and points to the manpage for
whatever you have configured.
I agree that the divergence between the manpage for x-terminal-emulator
(gnome-terminal) and the actual executable for x-terminal-emulator
(gnome-terminal.wrapper) is confusing and should be better documented.
--
Liam