Hello Nicholas.

16 Feb 24 17:26, you wrote to me:

 ?aNB>>> My terminal during that session is already 160 wide, so that's
 ?aNB>>> not the issue with the random wrapping of those characters,
 ?aNB>>> then.
 VA>> So do you have terminal 160 chars wide, but message displayed
 VA>> narrower?
 NB> Yes, the message itself was created by a script and was only 78
 NB> characters wide to begin with when it was created, and is posted to
 NB> the message base with 'hpt post'.

Then most probably it has 'soft CR'. You may dump message hex codes with 'I'.

 NB> I just think that my utf-8 hackery may be moving some of those line
 NB> drawing characters to the next line when it shouldn't be doing so.
 NB> Maybe there are some soft CRs in there I should be looking for (I
 NB> don't know how to spot those)?

I don't think it's because of UTF-8. Most probably it's just incorrect (for this specific case) settings. GoldEd has so many configuration parameters. It's very easy to screw it up.

 ?aNB>>> So am I actually able to specify which commit I would like to
 ?aNB>>> go back to with 'git bisect' or should I use 'git checkout'?
 ?aNB>>> If checkout is the answer, I won't be able to keep track of
 ?aNB>>> good or bad commits any more.

If you just want to use specific commit, then use git checkout. If you want to do binary search for broken commit - use git bisect interactively. Here's a tutorial, how to use it:

https://youtu.be/P3ZR_s3NFvM

 VA>> So how bisect works.
 VA>> You start process with git bisect start as you already did.
 VA>> First you mark some commit which is good for sure with git bisect
 VA>> good. Then mark "bad" commit with git bisect bad. That will be
 VA>> last commit in repo. git will checkout commit in the middle of
 VA>> those two for you. Then you build it and test. If it's good, run
 VA>> git bisect good, if it's bad, git bisect bad. Build it and test
 VA>> again.

 NB> That's how I understand it. However, you asked me to roll back to a
 NB> specific version, and git bisect is not able to do that.

Sorry for confusion. That's two different things to try. With specific version I wanted to make sure that version prior to my changes works correctly.

 NB> So without going that route, I can say ever since you've started
 NB> updating Golded I haven't had any display issues, until this latest
 NB> version. What you seemed to have fixed for Wilfred, did the opposite
 NB> for me. :)

And that's is very strange. I'd not be surprised if it was broken when I made first change (which was reverted by last commit), but looks like it worked fine.

Vitaliy

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20231030