[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

urxvt [was Re: GTK+ E-mail App on par with Mutt?]

On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 07:31:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 02/03/08 11:08, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 10:05:43AM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
> >> I'm finally taking the plunge from full CLI to using an X server, and in
> >> place of Mutt I've been using Evolution; But Evolution is nowhere near
> >> as good as Mutt, with threading/speed/customizability (And to boot I
> >> can't even use GViM as my editor!).
> >>
> >> Can anyone suggest a good GTK+ e-mail reader/writer? I have cron getting
> >> my e-mail so the client doesn't even need to have POP/IMAP.
> >>
> > 
> > Mutt in a gnome-terminal? (At least you can then pretend that its GTK).
> > 
> > :)
> Why waste all that RAM, when rxvt & xterm work just as well?

I've tried (only a little though) to understand the differences
between different terminals, and darned if I can tell. Of course the
bloated gui-ified ones have nice features like right click menus, url
highlighting and that sort of thing. But once you get away from that,
I can't see that there really are any substantive differences unless
your goal is to customize the heck out of it. Then I suppose the
different ways they are customized might come into play. 

So, I lately started using urxvt because of it's client-server
model. The visible usable instances of a terminal are just clients to
the one true terminal server instance, I guess. There is only one
instance of urxvt shown in ps -e. I guess that is truly some savings
in footprint. 

there is no point to this email, I guess, except to say the urxvt
seems pretty cool and mutt appears to work just fine in it! (there's
my nice tie-in to the original topic).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: