3 ms·

There's also 'tmux': http://tmux.sourceforge.net/ http://tmux.sourceforge.net/

by gnosis 15y ago

tel 15y ago
True, screen and screenlikes. I've never used tmux, mostly because screen just works well enough for me.
dredmorbius 15y ago
Which according to reports has the benefit of being maintainable. GNU screen, which I love and use to obscene extents daily, has an exceptionally hairy codebase. That said, I've got to get my tmux on and learn how to do screen equivalents with it.... http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/is-tmux-the-gnu-screen-killer/1901 http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/is-tmux-the-gnu-...
- res0nat0r 15y ago
  I keep seeing people comment on the codebase of screen being bad vs tmux, but I'm not sure why that is an issue? Are there any features of screen missing that haven't been added to the codebase? The vertical split patch has been added a long while back, and even though I'm sure tmux has a smaller memory footprint, I've never had an occasion where screen has ever been an app I'm worried might impact my server memory usage. Since it is installed for the most part everywhere I have no desire to switch to tmux.
  - dredmorbius 15y ago
    I can think of a few. If there are problems found with screen (and it's a widely used admin tool that may be left running on remote servers, hence a high-value attack vector), it's going to be harder to find and fix the problem. If there are features to be added, they'll be harder to add to screen than tmux. Which means that with time, tmux stands a higher chance of becoming more featureful. Both argue in favor of tmux in the long run, though there's no immediate need to ditch screen. As you note, screen's very widely available, which is a feature. Then again, so was telnet 10 years ago.
  - leif 15y ago
    FWIW, I've switched to tmux but think tmux's implementation of split screen is broken and desperately miss screen's. Screen lets each part of a split screen select a different existing window. Tmux makes both parts of a split part of a single window, so you can either have two things going in one split, or have something else going on in another window, but if you suddenly decide you want two existing windows side by side, you can't do it.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    Yes. screen will not run in terminals with long names, like rxvt-unicode-256color. This is due to a fixed-length buffer for storing the terminal name. Simple solution: make the buffer bigger. I did that and submitted the patch to Debian and upstream, and last I looked, it was still broken. I switched to tmux and never looked back. OK, I looked back and it's fixed now: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621804 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621804. 6 months is a long time to wait. (Not that I'm criticizing Debian. It would never be fixed if it wasn't for the distributions patching it.)

There's also 'tmux': http://tmux.sourceforge.net/ http://tmux.sourceforge.net/

by gnosis 15y ago

There's also 'tmux': http://tmux.sourceforge.net/ http://tmux.sourceforge.net/

tel 15y ago

True, screen and screenlikes. I've never used tmux, mostly because screen just works well enough for me.

dredmorbius 15y ago

Which according to reports has the benefit of being maintainable. GNU screen, which I love and use to obscene extents daily, has an exceptionally hairy codebase. That said, I've got to get my tmux on and learn how to do screen equivalents with it.... http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/is-tmux-the-gnu-screen-killer/1901 http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/is-tmux-the-gnu-...

res0nat0r 15y ago
I keep seeing people comment on the codebase of screen being bad vs tmux, but I'm not sure why that is an issue? Are there any features of screen missing that haven't been added to the codebase? The vertical split patch has been added a long while back, and even though I'm sure tmux has a smaller memory footprint, I've never had an occasion where screen has ever been an app I'm worried might impact my server memory usage. Since it is installed for the most part everywhere I have no desire to switch to tmux.
- dredmorbius 15y ago
  I can think of a few. If there are problems found with screen (and it's a widely used admin tool that may be left running on remote servers, hence a high-value attack vector), it's going to be harder to find and fix the problem. If there are features to be added, they'll be harder to add to screen than tmux. Which means that with time, tmux stands a higher chance of becoming more featureful. Both argue in favor of tmux in the long run, though there's no immediate need to ditch screen. As you note, screen's very widely available, which is a feature. Then again, so was telnet 10 years ago.
- leif 15y ago
  FWIW, I've switched to tmux but think tmux's implementation of split screen is broken and desperately miss screen's. Screen lets each part of a split screen select a different existing window. Tmux makes both parts of a split part of a single window, so you can either have two things going in one split, or have something else going on in another window, but if you suddenly decide you want two existing windows side by side, you can't do it.
- jrockway 15y ago
  Yes. screen will not run in terminals with long names, like rxvt-unicode-256color. This is due to a fixed-length buffer for storing the terminal name. Simple solution: make the buffer bigger. I did that and submitted the patch to Debian and upstream, and last I looked, it was still broken. I switched to tmux and never looked back. OK, I looked back and it's fixed now: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621804 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621804. 6 months is a long time to wait. (Not that I'm criticizing Debian. It would never be fixed if it wasn't for the distributions patching it.)