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

St – simple terminal

st.suckless.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 88 posts

Re: St – simple terminal

#21

Post by Zardoz84 »

RobinBlk7 wrote: post #13
Zardoz84 wrote: post #6

I use Konsole and yaquake always. Tabs, colors, profiles (I just have one for neovim), nice font rendering, split windows, copy&paste from clipboard... Apart, Windows needs a good terminal. Console2 and ConEmu, not end to work fine... I get strange issues with colors every time that I connect to ssh against a GNU/Linux machine and open vim.

ConEmu works fine with colors. Your ssh client does not...

Yeah, I just learned that I should use ConEmu + Putty. At least now, I don't get weird colors and a grey background filling all when I open vim. But I keep missing having something like Yakuake or Konsole.

Re: St – simple terminal

#22

Post by exDM69 »

Xylemon wrote: post #2

Seems nice, however I do like the idea of a GTK2 based and tabbed terminal. Sadly, a lot of them feel very bloated.

st uses the Xembed protocol so you can use tabs with it using the "tabbed" utility from the same site (ie. you can embed many st instances into tabbed).

Or just use tmux for "tabs", you'll need something like that anyway for scrollback, etc.

Re: St – simple terminal

#23

Post by p8952 »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #21
RobinBlk7 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ConEmu works fine with colors. Your ssh client does not...

Yeah, I just learned that I should use ConEmu + Putty. At least now, I don't get weird colors and a grey background filling all when I open vim. But I keep missing having something like Yakuake or Konsole.

I use Mintty, the terminal which comes with Cygwin, and it works great both on Windows and while ssh'ed into Unix boxes.

Windows + Vim: https://i.imgur.com/soTIhNy.png

SSH + Vim: https://i.imgur.com/aLs9ACy.png

Re: St – simple terminal

#24

Post by staz »

1_player wrote: post #16
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #5

I like suckless. I use some of their tools within my Awesome(WM) sessions. However, I don't see the point of St. There are dozens of other graphical terminal emulators that were created with the exact same goal: "Xterm's codebase sucks, we can do better". FWIW, I've (currently[1]) settled on ROXTerm, which (on Debian and Ubuntu) comes in GTK2 and GTK3 variants. I use Tmux within it. It does FreeType and FontConfig fo…

I've used gnome-terminal, sakura and now I'm using terminator: http://gnometerminator.blogspot.co.uk/p/introduction.html The main difference with the other terminal emulators is that I can easily do horizontal and vertical window splits. Many use screen or tmux for that but I find them too limiting, especially in their scrollback implementation.

Gnome-terminal, rox-term, sakura and terminator are actually all based on the same terminal emulation backend: libvte

Re: St – simple terminal

#25

Post by emilburzo »

e12e wrote: post #12
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #5

I like suckless. I use some of their tools within my Awesome(WM) sessions. However, I don't see the point of St. There are dozens of other graphical terminal emulators that were created with the exact same goal: "Xterm's codebase sucks, we can do better". FWIW, I've (currently[1]) settled on ROXTerm, which (on Debian and Ubuntu) comes in GTK2 and GTK3 variants. I use Tmux within it. It does FreeType and FontConfig fo…

I've been using a few - in the end I landed on sakura: http://www.pleyades.net/david/projects/sakura I don't quite remember why I ended up moving from urxvt to sakura (and not eg: roxterm) -- but I think it was a combination of it being light (enough), easy to set up without any kind of window decorations, as well as a sane way to pick and choose fonts. With the current gtk ~/.conf-scheme it has a nice ini-like confi…

Thanks for letting me know about sakura, I think it's the first one to actually match the rendering speed of xterm.

I do have one question though, why are the colors more pale in sakura than in xterm?

And is there any way to change it?

Re: St – simple terminal

#26

Post by lamby »

lsiebert wrote: post #14
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #5

I like suckless. I use some of their tools within my Awesome(WM) sessions. However, I don't see the point of St. There are dozens of other graphical terminal emulators that were created with the exact same goal: "Xterm's codebase sucks, we can do better". FWIW, I've (currently[1]) settled on ROXTerm, which (on Debian and Ubuntu) comes in GTK2 and GTK3 variants. I use Tmux within it. It does FreeType and FontConfig fo…

I like roxterm, but I recently switched to xfce's terminal, which lets me load it without a menu bar, (I like having more vertical space). More options are good.

hide_menubar=1 in roxterm config :)

Re: St – simple terminal

#27

Post by shmerl »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #6

I use Konsole and yaquake always. Tabs, colors, profiles (I just have one for neovim), nice font rendering, split windows, copy&paste from clipboard... Apart, Windows needs a good terminal. Console2 and ConEmu, not end to work fine... I get strange issues with colors every time that I connect to ssh against a GNU/Linux machine and open vim.

Konsole is great.

Re: St – simple terminal

#28

Post by davidgerard »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #6

I use Konsole and yaquake always. Tabs, colors, profiles (I just have one for neovim), nice font rendering, split windows, copy&paste from clipboard... Apart, Windows needs a good terminal. Console2 and ConEmu, not end to work fine... I get strange issues with colors every time that I connect to ssh against a GNU/Linux machine and open vim.

If I'm stuck on Windows, I just use a Cygwin console and ssh to the world.

Re: St – simple terminal

#29

Post by aartur »

> xterm is bloated and unmaintainable (...) It has over 65K lines of code and emulates obscure and obsolete terminals you will never need.

The way these things are usually implemented is that there is an interface of a "terminal" and implementations. As long as implementations do not break the abstraction and do not require modifications in the interface and other parts of code these implementations do not decrease internal software quality. They only cause bloatedness in terms of size of source code files which doesn't matter much.

I read something similar on Neovim's site, that they removed support of obsoleted architectures. And as an opposing example it seems that Linux kernel ships with drivers for very old devices and doesn't have plans for removing them.

Note that I don't know if in xterm's or vim's case implementations for obsolete subsystems cause real damage or only increase code size.

And when I was choosing a terminal implementation, I mostly benchmarked scrolling performance and looked at font rendering quality and xterm won. It is also actively maintained outside of Xorg [0].

[0] http://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.log.html

Re: St – simple terminal

#30

Post by psibi »

aartur wrote: post #29

> xterm is bloated and unmaintainable (...) It has over 65K lines of code and emulates obscure and obsolete terminals you will never need. The way these things are usually implemented is that there is an interface of a "terminal" and implementations. As long as implementations do not break the abstraction and do not require modifications in the interface and other parts of code these implementations do not decrease i…

> Linux kernel ships with drivers for very old devices and doesn't have plans for removing them.

I think as long as there is someone to maintain that driver, it doesn't get removed.

Post reply on HN