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

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

Quoth Andrew Sackville-West:
> 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?
> Of course the
> bloated gui-ified ones have nice features like right click menus, url
> highlighting and that sort of thing. 

You know that urxvt has that, too? A lot of different menus (try
control-mouse3 ore control-mouse2. You can even rot13 your selection! That's
what I call a geek's delight...) And url-selection and automatic forwarding to
browsers is just as easy. In your ~/.Xdefaults, write:

! Mark and launch URLs directly
URxvt.urlLauncher: 	firefox
URxvt.perl-ext: 	matcher

And there you go!

> 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. 

Somewhere, I don't know where and I don't know if it's true, I heard that urxvtd
will not free() the storage connected to the individual clients. So you can't
reduce its memory usage by just killing them all off (you will, however
definetely free the space wired to the shells) - but when you create another
terminal instance that memory's going to be re-used, or so I heard. That may be
complete BS, though.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: