foot - https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot Fast, lightweight and minimalistic Wayland terminal emulator. Features: * Fast * Lightweight, in dependencies, on-disk and in-memory * Wayland native * DE agnostic * Server/daemon mode * User configurable font fallback * On-the-fly font resize * On-the-fly DPI font size adjustment * Scrollback search * Keyboard driven URL detection * Color emoji support * IME (via text-input-v3)…
Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
71–80 of 149 posts
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#72Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#73I just want unicode and tabs and a way to set background and foreground colors.
I also like lxterminal and of course the emacs shell.
I did try kitty after reading this, but is failed because of my openGL configuration. Silly.
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#74Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#75Vanilla xterm. It uses a lot less resources than any other emulator. Thomas Dickey keeps it updated. It has an unusual, but usable scroll bar. You can configure cut-n-paste to help you with command line work. You can change what a "word" is for cutting/copying to include /, ., *, so working with Unix file names is easier.
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#76Kitty is an amazing terminal if you are willing to spend some time to learn and customize it. Take a look at the screencast on its website, it is super powerful and will make your coworkers and friends jealous. https://sw.kovidgoyal.net/kitty/
What do you take time to learn/customize about kitty?
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#77Vanilla xterm. It uses a lot less resources than any other emulator. Thomas Dickey keeps it updated. It has an unusual, but usable scroll bar. You can configure cut-n-paste to help you with command line work. You can change what a "word" is for cutting/copying to include /, ., *, so working with Unix file names is easier.
I use plain xterm as well. With 6x13 aka 'fixed' bitmap font. Clean, simple, fast. I don't want background images, or transparency, or beautifully rendered fonts: I want to be able to clearly distinguish characters with minimum mental/visual effort, and pack as many of them into the available screen real-estate as I can see. I also turn off color highlighting, which I don't find useful (in a shell). My prompt is a si…
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#78foot - https://codeberg.org/dnkl/foot Fast, lightweight and minimalistic Wayland terminal emulator. Features: * Fast * Lightweight, in dependencies, on-disk and in-memory * Wayland native * DE agnostic * Server/daemon mode * User configurable font fallback * On-the-fly font resize * On-the-fly DPI font size adjustment * Scrollback search * Keyboard driven URL detection * Color emoji support * IME (via text-input-v3)…
Kitty was alright but I prefer a bitmap font in terminals and I'd rather have one that just lets me use it without having to do tricks which you have to do with Kitty.
Alacritty is also good but I don't care about X support at all.
Re: Ask HN: Which Linux terminal emulator do you prefer and why?
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use plain xterm as well. With 6x13 aka 'fixed' bitmap font. Clean, simple, fast. I don't want background images, or transparency, or beautifully rendered fonts: I want to be able to clearly distinguish characters with minimum mental/visual effort, and pack as many of them into the available screen real-estate as I can see. I also turn off color highlighting, which I don't find useful (in a shell). My prompt is a si…
With `pwd`, `gb` and `gs` why do I need prompt taking up horizontal space?