Solved micro editor without syntax highlighting

[gotnull]

Hi guys,

I use a text editor called editors/micro, problem it seems that the current version doesn't have any syntax highlighting.
So I wonder if it is just me or if it is a bug in the FreeBSD's package, I know that the Linux's version runs okay.
I installed it via pkg (I do not compile software), the system is on 13.1 stable not latest.
I checked my shell settings and nothing should interfere, and to be sure I installed neovim to compare and it does use syntax highlighting so I do not think my settings are wrong, beside I temporary changed the shell just in case but the problem persisted.
Can a micro user confirm this ?
Thank you

 ~ : freebsd-version -kru
13.1-RELEASE-p2
13.1-RELEASE-p2
13.1-RELEASE-p2

 ~ : doas pkg info micro
micro-2.0.11_2
Name           : micro
Version        : 2.0.11_2
Installed on   : Tue Oct 11 22:27:46 2022 CEST
Origin         : editors/micro
Architecture   : FreeBSD:13:amd64
Prefix         : /usr/local
Categories     : editors
Licenses       : MIT
Maintainer     : lcook@FreeBSD.org
WWW            : https://micro-editor.github.io/
Comment        : Modern and intuitive terminal-based text editor
Options        :
    DEBUG          : off
    DOCS           : on
Annotations    :
    FreeBSD_version: 1301000
    repo_type      : binary
    repository     : FreeBSD
Flat size      : 11.1MiB
Description    :
Micro is a terminal-based text editor that aims to be easy to use and
intuitive, while also taking advantage of the full capabilities of modern
terminals.

WWW: https://micro-editor.github.io/

 

[rorgoroth]

Can you try the binary provided by https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/releases/tag/v2.0.11 ?

A few months back on my dev container running alpine micro suddenly lost all syntax highlighting support but the binary from github worked fine, a few weeks later I saw micro get updated and tried the system one again and syntax highlighting worked fine.

Taking a quick look at their git history this commit looks promoising: https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports/...o?id=20d1a8722b5600f9d3d6d341484ca4c135b284ce

You should cross reference that with the freebsd ports file to see if it issues the extra build command.

 

[T-Daemon]

Not a editors/micro user but I had a look at the problem. It could be a bug. Not sure if it's on FreeBSD side or upstream. The port comes with a lot of source files (see ports/editors/micro/distinfo).

According to /usr/local/share/doc/micro/README.md:

### Colors and syntax highlighting

If you open micro and it doesn't seem like syntax highlighting is working, this is probably because
you are using a terminal which does not support 256 color mode. Try changing the color scheme to `simple`
by pressing <kbd>Ctrl-e</kbd> in micro and typing `set colorscheme simple`.

If you are using the default Ubuntu terminal, to enable 256 make sure your `TERM` variable is set
to `xterm-256color`.

I tried changing the colorschem, checked TERM=xterm-256color, run micro in x11/rxvt-unicode, x11/xterm, x11/xfce4-terminal, no syntax highlighting.

If a syntax file is placed under ~/.config/micro/syntax/, syntax highlighting works for that file type.

For example sh.yaml:



That file overrides the build-in syntax file (they can be viewed from the binary, even documentation is compiled into the binary: strings /usr/local/bin/micro | less )

You should open a PR.

 

[gotnull]

Can you try the binary provided by https://github.com/zyedidia/micro/releases/tag/v2.0.11 ?

omg I am sorry I forgot this !
You won't believe it, I've already downloaded the binary earlier today then I don't know what happened after that ? I guess my mind went somewhere, I don't know where exactly but it seems to be a place far but really far away ?
Thank you rorgoroth for the reminder

So I tried the binary and it works fine.
freebsd pkg provides the version: 2.0.11_2 (22.10.06)
the micro git repo provides the version: 2.0.11 (22.08.01)

I tried changing the colorschem, checked TERM=xterm-256color, run micro in x11/rxvt-unicode, x11/xterm, x11/xfce4-terminal, no syntax highlighting.

Yep I almost did the same before opening the thread with the same result, that confirms something is wrong with the package I guess.

If a syntax file is placed under ~/.config/micro/syntax/, syntax highlighting works for that file type.

I tried it with the Freebsd package, put all the syntax files into the dedicated dir, and it worked too, nice catch T-Daemon !

You should open a PR.

I am not sure to follow, you mean report the bug on the Freebsd's bugzilla ? or really a PR ?

 

[T-Daemon]

I am not sure to follow, you mean report the bug on the Freebsd's bugzilla ? or really a PR ?

Sorry for expressing myself not clearer. I meant report the bug on the FreeBSD's bugzilla. Here in forums PR (Problem Report) is mostly used as a term for bug reports.

 

[gotnull]

No problem you probably express yourself better than me, next time I'll read PR on the forum I'll remember it, plus it looks like the official term around here:

Bug Reports

FreeBSD is an operating system used to power modern servers, desktops, and embedded platforms.

www.freebsd.org

So I followed your advice and I reported the bug, now as people say wait & see:

267122 – editors/micro: missing syntax highlighting

bugs.freebsd.org

Thanks both of you T-Daemon & rorgoroth for your help

 

[gotnull]

A fix has been made that I did not test yet .
Thanks Alexey ?
He also improved the package by adding a man page, a desktop file, and icons.

Correct me if I am wrong , but I do need to be on "latest" to benefit from the fix, right ?
If so I will need to learn bhyve (which is on my todo list) sooner than I thought .

 

[T-Daemon]

Correct me if I am wrong , but I do need to be on "latest" to benefit from the fix, right ?

Not necessarily. You could ask in the PR you have filed, that the update be also applied to ports branch 2022Q4 (quarterly branch). If applied, a package should be available shortly after in the quarterly package repository.

 

[gotnull]

Okay that's a good news then, I will do that then, if it's a possible thing to do it worth asking for it.
I will update the post to let you know what happens.

 

[gotnull]

Done, I asked for it, but I didn't change the PR's status from "fixed" to "open" (or even if I am able to do it), I wonder if it's the right way to proceed, I mean the bug is fixed now so does the PR deserve really to be reopened ?

 

[T-Daemon]

Done, I asked for it, but I didn't change the PR's status from "fixed" to "open" (or even if I am able to do it), I wonder if it's the right way to proceed, I mean the bug is fixed now so does the PR deserve really to be reopened ?

The PR doesn't need to be reopened for your request. The author and committer of the commit (Alexey) will receive with your comment in the PR automatically a mail and can evaluate your query.

 

[gotnull]

The PR doesn't need to be reopened for your request. The author and committer of the commit (Alexey) will receive with your comment in the PR automatically a mail and can evaluate your query.

Yep it looks like you right because he already answered. Thank you for the explanation.

I post his answer here:

I don't do quarterlies (nor I should be even allowed to, given it's a ports-secteam@ territory) but I'll try to find someone who might help.

So I will keep my fingers crossed.

 

[gotnull]

An update came yesterday in quarterly, so the version is 2.0.11_5 while in port it's 2.0.11_7
Now that I am using the binary from pkg I ditched the one coming from the github repository, and it looks like everything is fine, the syntax highlighting works as it should.
The problem is solved , thank you to every helpers who came by.