4 ms·

Screens main use case is to open an emacs session remotely. Tmux's main use case is to be glue for a unix IDE. The two use cases are rather different and the

Screens main use case is to open an emacs session remotely. Tmux's main use case is to be glue for a unix IDE. The two use cases are rather different and the tools are very specialized for them.

skydhash 1y ago
I switched to dtach for the first case.
- kps 1y ago
  dtach for session persistence. “Do one thing well.”
anthk 1y ago
Emacs can work as a daemon.
- noosphr 1y ago
  It also has tramp mode which means you can use all your local packages remotely.
  - taeric 1y ago
    When I realized how powerful TRAMP was, I don't think I ever used screen/tmux again. I'm sure there are uses, mind. Just TRAMP fully hit all of my needs.
    - kstrauser 1y ago
      It really is magical, isn’t it? And although I rarely need to use it, I love the multihop setups where you can ssh to this system, then ssh again to this other, then mount an SMB filesystem using these credentials, and start editing.
penguin_booze 1y ago
> Screens main use case is to open an emacs session remotely. Not an emacs user, but for this, what does screen do that tmux can't?
- wkat4242 1y ago
  Nothing but replacing it with something newer invalidates decades of muscle memory. I switched to tmux eventually though.
- kstrauser 1y ago
  Nothing at all. I’ve used emacs over tmux (and now zellij) for many years. Emacsserver can replace both of them, but that’s a different story.
radlad 1y ago
I'm confused by this statement. Are you claiming this is the projects' stated goal? Their primary use in the wild?
jstanley 1y ago
Nah, screen's main use case is as an ad-hoc method to daemonise random scripts.
- fnordpiglet 1y ago
  Yeah this is 100% of when I reach for screen. “I’m not willing/ready to make this a service, screen detach here I come”
- senderista 1y ago
  Let's see, we have at least daemonize[0], nohup[1], and disown[2] for that. Some discussion of the differences: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3886/difference-between-nohup-disown-and https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3886/difference-bet... [0] https://github.com/bmc/daemonize https://github.com/bmc/daemonize [1] https://linux.die.net/man/1/nohup https://linux.die.net/man/1/nohup [2] https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/bash/manual/bash.html#Job-Control-Builtins https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/bash/manual/bash....
  - teddyh 1y ago
    A more modern alternative is systemd-run: <https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd-run.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/syst...>

Screens main use case is to open an emacs session remotely. Tmux's main use case is to be glue for a unix IDE. The two use cases are rather different and the tools are very specialized for them.

skydhash 1y ago

I switched to dtach for the first case.

kps 1y ago
dtach for session persistence. “Do one thing well.”

anthk 1y ago

Emacs can work as a daemon.

noosphr 1y ago
It also has tramp mode which means you can use all your local packages remotely.
- taeric 1y ago
  When I realized how powerful TRAMP was, I don't think I ever used screen/tmux again. I'm sure there are uses, mind. Just TRAMP fully hit all of my needs.
  - kstrauser 1y ago
    It really is magical, isn’t it? And although I rarely need to use it, I love the multihop setups where you can ssh to this system, then ssh again to this other, then mount an SMB filesystem using these credentials, and start editing.

penguin_booze 1y ago

> Screens main use case is to open an emacs session remotely. Not an emacs user, but for this, what does screen do that tmux can't?

wkat4242 1y ago
Nothing but replacing it with something newer invalidates decades of muscle memory. I switched to tmux eventually though.
kstrauser 1y ago
Nothing at all. I’ve used emacs over tmux (and now zellij) for many years. Emacsserver can replace both of them, but that’s a different story.

radlad 1y ago

I'm confused by this statement. Are you claiming this is the projects' stated goal? Their primary use in the wild?

jstanley 1y ago

Nah, screen's main use case is as an ad-hoc method to daemonise random scripts.

fnordpiglet 1y ago
Yeah this is 100% of when I reach for screen. “I’m not willing/ready to make this a service, screen detach here I come”
senderista 1y ago
Let's see, we have at least daemonize[0], nohup[1], and disown[2] for that. Some discussion of the differences: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3886/difference-between-nohup-disown-and https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/3886/difference-bet... [0] https://github.com/bmc/daemonize https://github.com/bmc/daemonize [1] https://linux.die.net/man/1/nohup https://linux.die.net/man/1/nohup [2] https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/bash/manual/bash.html#Job-Control-Builtins https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/bash/manual/bash....
- teddyh 1y ago
  A more modern alternative is systemd-run: <https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/systemd-run.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/syst...>