OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86? - BSD
This is a discussion on OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86? - BSD ; Begin
On 2005-12-05, jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl
wrote:
>> The best reason for having X is to be able to have lots of xterms open at
>> once. Even if you prefer console-based newsreaders, mail clients,
>> editors, etc, it's nice to be ...
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
Begin <4394cf19$0$35287$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl>
On 2005-12-05, jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl
wrote:
>> The best reason for having X is to be able to have lots of xterms open at
>> once. Even if you prefer console-based newsreaders, mail clients,
>> editors, etc, it's nice to be able to see them all at once.
>
> Hmm, I like screen(1) for that, or virtual terminals, or shell job
> control. Not simultaneous, but close enough for most practical
> applications. And screen can do split-screen.
I won't deny that screen(1) is highly useful, but it is not a full
replacement for an X display full of xterms. If I write code, I often
end up with at least two xterms, both running the same screen. One
screen-terminal runs nvi with whatever I'm working on, the other is for
compiling and running. More screen-terminals and xterms are created for
manpages and other references as needed.
> And I've not seen an xterm yet that can match the readability, minimal
> memory footprint and utter clarity of the console. Granted, that may be
> because I've not looked that hard...
I'm using ye olde xterm and IMAO it beats the console on i386 by quite a
bit. There, the standard 80x25 textmode with 8x16 character cells uses
only 640x480, or a not-quite-fitting expanded hack on laptops. Other
modes get more lines (80x50 by using 8x8 character cells instead), and
more width but better character rendering isn't usually an option.
My xterms normally run 80x40 and the font is fairly easy to replace
with something else. Better yet, with a control-right-click a menu
pops up that lets me select the default or one of six alternate fonts.
Redefining them can be done on the command line or through X resources.
> That being said, while I spent a couple of months without X, I'm growing
> rather too fond of www.userfriendly.org and a couple of other sites to
> do without some form of graphical browser again.
An addict but still somewhat in denial, then. :-)
--
j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .
This message was originally posted on Usenet in plain text.
Any other representation, additions, or changes do not have my
consent and may be a violation of international copyright law.
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
Mark South wrote:
> The best reason for having X is to be able to have lots of xterms open at
> once. Even if you prefer console-based newsreaders, mail clients,
> editors, etc, it's nice to be able to see them all at once.
>
I, personnaly use screen for such a purpose
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl wrote:
> Hmm, I like screen(1) for that, or virtual terminals, or shell job
> control. Not simultaneous, but close enough for most practical
> applications. And screen can do split-screen.
I whish it did vertical split as well as horizontal split. I would
stop using X with Ion3 as my Window manager which I use just to cut out
my desktop both horizontally and vertically to fill the "frames" with
xterms runing screens on all of them :-)
If screen (or any other console based application) allowed me to do a
similar thing on the console I would stop using X for 99% of the time.
--
Saludos,
Ángel
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
?ngel wrote:
> jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl wrote:
>> Hmm, I like screen(1) for that, or virtual terminals, or shell job
>> control. Not simultaneous, but close enough for most practical
>> applications. And screen can do split-screen.
>
> I whish it did vertical split as well as horizontal split. I would
> stop using X with Ion3 as my Window manager which I use just to cut out
> my desktop both horizontally and vertically to fill the "frames" with
> xterms runing screens on all of them :-)
>
> If screen (or any other console based application) allowed me to do a
> similar thing on the console I would stop using X for 99% of the time.
Hmm, your console must be much wider than mine. How did you manage to do
that? ;-)
I occasionally use vim's :vsplit command, but usually stop doing it soon
- the lines wrap far too much.
Joachim
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl wrote:
>> If screen (or any other console based application) allowed me to do a
>> similar thing on the console I would stop using X for 99% of the time.
>
> Hmm, your console must be much wider than mine. How did you manage to do
> that? ;-)
I have to admit I don't do that on OpenBSD, but on Debian GNU/Linux on
a desktop (I have used OpenBSD on servers only up to know). On Linux I
doit by choosing 132 characters wide on the available modes during boot
time. Using LILO (the LInux LOader) one can add the 'vga=ask' to be
asked for one of the possible VGA modes available.
There must be a way to do the same under *BSD.
> I occasionally use vim's :vsplit command, but usually stop doing it soon
> - the lines wrap far too much.
So do I, sometimes. But I rather prefer to split the desktop on
"frames" and open programs in them.
--
Saludos,
Ángel
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
they should put that somewhere
"must be able to type"
jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl wrote:
> huub wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank God. You're not supposed to use X on OpenBSD. It is *NOT* a
> >> desktop OS. If you want a desktop OS, use Windows 95 and stop posting
> >> in this newsgroup. Our community doesn't want people who seek an
> >> alternative to the command line.
> >>
> >
> > The FAQ tells me I *can* use it as a desktop OS. My intention though is
> > using it as server.
>
> Same troll. Though I must admit it's views on the command line have
> merits. ;-)
>
> Joachim
-
Re: OBSD 3.8 default: Xorg or XF86?
?ngel wrote:
> jKILLSPAM.schipper@math.uu.nl wrote:
>>> If screen (or any other console based application) allowed me to do a
>>> similar thing on the console I would stop using X for 99% of the time.
>>
>> Hmm, your console must be much wider than mine. How did you manage to do
>> that? ;-)
>
> I have to admit I don't do that on OpenBSD, but on Debian GNU/Linux on
> a desktop (I have used OpenBSD on servers only up to know). On Linux I
> doit by choosing 132 characters wide on the available modes during boot
> time. Using LILO (the LInux LOader) one can add the 'vga=ask' to be
> asked for one of the possible VGA modes available.
>
> There must be a way to do the same under *BSD.
Well, let me know when you find it... (it actually might be possible,
but the FAQ does not cover it and I am not concerned enough to read up
on the various console configuration commands).
And yes, 132 columns was my screen with in Linux too.
Joachim
