# urxvt bold colors are wrong - bold #0-7 are using colors from #8-15

My colors are off. Specifically, the bold version of colors 1-6 is broken:

The color of each (emboldened) index should match the color of the text beside it. It does not.

This is generated from this gist, modified to include colors #0-15. (It's identical except the , 16 on line 25 is removed.)

Update:

Here's what's going on: Bold #1 is using color #9, bold #2 is using color #10 and so on. I confirmed this by changing color9, color10, etc. in my .Xresources file.

I'm using solarized .Xresources and would rather keep colors #9-15 colored differently.

Furthermore, the bold colors are correct in xterm.

Why is urxvt Bold #0-7 using colors from #8-15, and how do I stop this?

-
Can you share your version of the script? It'd be helpful to see exactly what escape sequences you're sending. (e.g. intense vs. bold) –  benizi Nov 30 '12 at 1:11
It's literally exactly the same, except the ", 16" on line 25 is removed. –  So8res Nov 30 '12 at 4:59

Use the +is commandline flag, or (exactly equivalently), set the intensityStyles resource to false. From the man page:

intensityStyles: boolean

When font styles are not enabled, or this option is enabled (True, option -is, the default), bold/blink font styles imply high intensity foreground/background colours. Disabling this option (False, option +is) disables this behaviour, the high intensity colours are not reachable.

So, in .Xresources:

URxvt.intensityStyles: false


It's not clear which behavior is "right". (I prefer "bold" = "bold font".) Historically, some terminals treat SGR 1 ( \e[1m ) as "bold", and others treat it as "intense". Current terminals exhibit a mix of behaviors. Top row in each window is colors 0 through 15 in "bold". Second row is without "bold". (-bdc and +bdc is the XTerm equivalent of URxvt's -is and +is -- not sure why it only appears to affect color 0 on my system)

script to run the terminals in this image

-
Wow, terminal emulators really are a ghetto. Thank you very much, this was bugging the hell out of me. –  So8res Nov 30 '12 at 6:55