5 ms·
shpool doesn't allow splitting screens either! But I guess in my head, screen is largely for resuming a shell connection on a remote host while tmux is a window
by chaps 2y ago
shpool doesn't allow splitting screens either! But I guess in my head, screen is largely for resuming a shell connection on a remote host while tmux is a window splitter.
- remram 2y agoBoth of them are both of those things.
- lanstin 2y agoI always get scared when I accidentally have two shell sessions visible at once in tmux. I immediately exit one. I suppose I should read a bit on it. When I want side to side comparisons I go to the shell running emacs and do it there (post vague because I never remember the different words for windows and panes and shells etc these different apps use.)
- remram 2y agotmux has a server containing sessions containing windows containing panes. Screen has sessions, windows, and panes (which it calls regions). I recently finally switched from screen to tmux and I found that it's pretty seamless (especially because I use vi keybinds in tmux still). Some machines at work don't have screen anymore.
- lanstin 2y agoOk,makes sense. Using this terminology, I asked claude and found out how to move a shell from a standalone window to sharing 2 panes with another shell. Incidentally, this "screen absent" is why you should always volunteer to help create base shells (programmatically via packer not by hand) - emacs and tmux are always there when I made the image.
- remram 2y agoWhat's a base shell? I don't make the image.
- Phrodo_00 2y agoScreen and tmux are almost the same these days. Screen used to not allow side-by-side splits, but it can do that too now.
- wnoise 2y agoIt has allowed that for a long, long time.
- chaps 2y agoOkay, but is it actually good?