Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 201 posts

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#71

Post by tjoff »

xhrpost wrote: post #65
aranelsurion wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t mind explaining, what are the advantages you get over tmux?

Main thing that's keeping me right now is copy select with mouse that stays in pane. Tmux would always cross horizontal panes so I'd have to zoom the current pane, alt + mouse select, then unzoom. Zellij I just drag over what I want and release the mouse button. I do however miss using the mouse for pane resizing though.

tmux keeps the selection to the pane for me.

Not something I make use of though, feels faster to copy using the keyboard instead.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#72

Post by chaps »

eigenvalue wrote: post #57
tasuki wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does nohup allow attaching back to the session? That seems to be the primary use case of shpool.

No, it doesn't let you attach back, it just keeps a command going after you've disconnected your session. But if you have good logging that might be good enough.

Or use GDB to change stdin/stdout of the nohup'd process to the current shell!

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#73

Post by e12e »

chaps wrote: post #67

This is more of a `screen` replacement than a `tmux` replacement, yeah? Was hopeful for an actual replacement (no, not iterm) to tmux.

Aren't tmux and screen rather equivalent these days? How is an alternative to one, not an alternative to the other?

Shpool doesn't appear to allow for session sharing/remote pairing though?

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#74

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

thayne wrote: post #69
setopt wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The `tmux -CC` is pretty dope. I’m still surprised that not more terminals have picked it up yet. Most GUI features (new tab, new split, scroll, search, copy/paste, etc.) just work, and it all syncs with `tmux`. Be aware though that it can be a bit buggy if you have a fancy `tmux.conf`, and that if you rely on any `tmux` plugins then most of those simply won’t work.

I'm especially surprised that tmux itself can't be used as a client of a remote control mode session. It is pretty annoying that the only terminal that I know of that supports tmux control mode only works on mac.

I looked into this at one point. IIRC it turns out control mode was only added to tmux by the iterm2 dev, for use in his own project. So I guess he didn't care about adding support to tmux itself.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#75

Post by e12e »

freedomben wrote: post #44
blacklion wrote: post #7

No mention of screen? I'm too old.

I betrayed screen over a decade ago and switch to tmux, and have been immensely happy. I have a tremendous amount of love and appreciation for the venerable Screen, but realistically very few people use it anymore. I don't think it makes much sense to compare. For the few that do still use Screen, they pretty much know how it compares to tmux so the tmux compare is pretty applicable.

I'm a happy screen user. But tbh, the main benefit (to me) is default ctrl-a key binding, while tmux would require a config (which I actually think is great, that tmux politely doesn't conflict by default).

Not sure why I'd want to switch.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#76

Post by chaps »

e12e wrote: post #73
chaps wrote: post #67

This is more of a `screen` replacement than a `tmux` replacement, yeah? Was hopeful for an actual replacement (no, not iterm) to tmux.

Aren't tmux and screen rather equivalent these days? How is an alternative to one, not an alternative to the other? Shpool doesn't appear to allow for session sharing/remote pairing though?

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.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#77

Post by ori_b »

mikenew wrote: post #46

This is awesome! I hate the way tmux hijacks so much of my terminal's behavior (scrollback, seaching with escape-/, etc.) and I've been looking for something like this that will manage persistent sessions without any extra nonsense. BTW I think your readme shouldn't just characterize it as a resumeable ssh tool. I often need to start a long running process that I want to reconnect to later, or I want to put some alwa…

The thing is that without hijacking it and passing it through, you can't have nice things like handling resizes, supporting attaching with multiple terminal emulators, or reconnecting to applications that make heavy use of terminal escape codes, because all of those set up persistent state in the terminal emulator.

As a result, any tmux-like layer needs to emulate a console in order to get a view into the state, and then re-render that emulated console on attach to restore state to the terminal emulator that you're connected from.

From the readme, this tool does that, kinda. I'm actually confused about why they'd go to the effort of implementing a VT100 emulator, write the code to redraw the screen from it, and yet not bother with doing the work that would let multiple terminal emulators attach.

This feels like it sits in a weird place between simple, crude tools like dtach, and tools like tmux; shpool has done most of the work to implement tmux-style behavior, and then decides to cut weird corners.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#78

Post by sandreas »

mikenew wrote: post #46

This is awesome! I hate the way tmux hijacks so much of my terminal's behavior (scrollback, seaching with escape-/, etc.) and I've been looking for something like this that will manage persistent sessions without any extra nonsense. BTW I think your readme shouldn't just characterize it as a resumeable ssh tool. I often need to start a long running process that I want to reconnect to later, or I want to put some alwa…

I think you would love zellij[1]. Go check it out, it is awesome.

1: https://zellij.dev/

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#79

Post by rangerelf »

threePointFive wrote: post #62
tasuki wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does nohup allow attaching back to the session? That seems to be the primary use case of shpool.

Nohup still attaches to the terminal's stdin/out/err. If the process is known to be non-interactive, redirecting to log files should be sufficient (tail -f to "reattach"). If it does expect interaction, creating a fifo file to redirect stdin from should work, but I've never tested it.

nohub doesn't attach nor redirect the stdin/out/err, it intercepts the HUP signal that apps receive when their controlling TTYs are disconnected.

Implying "tail -f $LOGFILE" is akin to tmux reattaching to a console is a stretch.

Re: Show HN: Shpool, a Lightweight Tmux Alternative

#80

Post by whalesalad »

ethanpailes wrote: post #29
whalesalad wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/whalesalad/dotfiles/blob/master/tmux.conf... Scrolling works pretty well for me.

tmux does support scrolling and copy-paste, but they often work subtly differently than the way they do in a native terminal. For example, when I try putting `set -g mouse on` in `~/.tmux.conf`, scrolling mostly works fine but if I scroll up and then start typing or press up, I won't jump right to the bottom of the session the way I'm used to in native Alacritty (which I will often do as a way to return after scrolli…

nothing in life is free, what do you honestly expect?
Post reply on HN