Fails to detect sixel support under kitty

[gwolf]

I tried to use lsix in kitty 0.35.1, which has sixel support, but lsix reports:

Error: Your terminal does not report having sixel graphics support.

Please use a sixel capable terminal, such as xterm -ti vt340, or
ask your terminal manufacturer to add sixel support.

You may test your terminal by viewing a single image, like so:

  convert  foo.jpg  -geometry 800x480  sixel:-

If your terminal actually does support sixel, please file a bug
report at http://github.com/hackerb9/lsix/issues

Please mention device attribute codes: ^[[?62;c

[hackerb9]

What happens when you test your terminal by viewing a single image, like so:

convert  foo.jpg  -geometry 800x480  sixel:-

[hackerb9]

By the way, the device attribute codes indicate that kitty does not support sixel. (There would be 4 in the list if it did). That could be a bug in kitty if it actually can handle sixel graphics.

[TiagoferMC]

Kitty has its own image handling format that's superior to sixel as it supports a lot more. A lot of programs that support sixel also support this format. It might be something worth considering adding,

[gwolf]

By the way, the device attribute codes indicate that kitty does not support sixel. (There would be 4 in the list if it did). That could be a bug in kitty if it actually can handle sixel graphics.

Right, I did as you suggest, and the call to convert spews out apparent garbage.

I guess it's what @TiagoferMC mentions. I view i.e. images attached to my mail inline by calling chafa --colors 256 --color-space=din99d --symbols=all foo.jpg; I thought chafa was outputting sixels, but its manpage mentions:

-f, --format format
Set output format; one of [iterm, kitty, sixels, symbols]. The default is iterm, kitty or sixels if the connected terminal supports one of these, falling back to symbols ("ANSI art") otherwise.

[hackerb9]

Yes, chafa is some deep magic and perhaps I should replace ImageMagick with it.