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

You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

xn--gckvb8fzb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#11

Post by ykonstant »

fambalamboni wrote: post #6

I use screen all the time in an SSH session. Locally, not so much. Although if I'm running something that I know will take hours, I tend to run that in Screen because I'm likely to nuke the terminal by accident.

"Nuking the terminal by accident" is a serious thing for me; I do it all the time, though usually it is not a big deal. I have way too many terminal windows open because I do all sorts of chaotic nonsense and my "open terminal" shortcut is too convenient.

What I really need, however, is a simple shortcut that yanks the terminal window from wherever it is, puts it in the current workspace and focuses on it. I keep postponing making it, it should be simple with xorg tools (can you do that in Wayland?).

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#12

Post by schaefer »

From TFA: My impression is that the sole purpose of the terminal multiplexer hype train stems from a perceived sense of pseudo-elitism…

—-

Whoa there buddy. It’s fine to say: “I tried a thing, and it just wasn’t for me”.

But to proceed from that point and onto: “so rather just letting things be, or making a good-faith effort to understand those with differing opinions, I’m going to project and harshly judge them” is such a downer.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, I tried reading this blog and it just wasn’t for me.

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#15

Post by hyperman1 »

I started to use tmux on remote machines to stop them disconnecting me when the network changes or the laptop sleeps. (Damn you systemd for breaking that, too)

Then I started multiple tmux panes remotely because it was great for dumping the long process monitoring next to the long process

Then I started using tmux panes remotely for task switching.

Then I started using tmux locally because I already knew all the keybindings and tricks.

And there are still multiple browsers, IDEs and whatnots in other windows.

At no point, the points the article touches had any relevancy. It just grew on me. So you all do whatever floats your boat, and I'll continue doung mine.

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#16

Post by rpdillon »

ykonstant wrote: post #11
fambalamboni wrote: post #6

I use screen all the time in an SSH session. Locally, not so much. Although if I'm running something that I know will take hours, I tend to run that in Screen because I'm likely to nuke the terminal by accident.

"Nuking the terminal by accident" is a serious thing for me; I do it all the time, though usually it is not a big deal. I have way too many terminal windows open because I do all sorts of chaotic nonsense and my "open terminal" shortcut is too convenient. What I really need, however, is a simple shortcut that yanks the terminal window from wherever it is, puts it in the current workspace and focuses on it. I keep pos…

I use Guake for this. I have it configured to fire up Tmux and then I have it bound to Ctrl Alt T, and it drops down a terminal anywhere I am: any desktop, any screen. I didn't read the entire article (I don't think it's particularly well-written or stems from any particular expertise in the domain), but I doubt the author addresses the huge advantage I see with terminal multiplexers, which is it allows me to cut and paste from the terminal without using a mouse, and allows me to log scroll back and capture sessions effectively in any terminal emulator I use, not just a fancy one like iTerm2.

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#17

Post by floren »

bee_rider wrote: post #10

The argument here seems to be: “the features you like about terminal multiplexers should be built into your terminal emulator, or your window manager, or I don’t see why they are really necessary.” Plus some complaints about influencers. Sure, I’ll just replace my perfectly functional window manager so I can avoid using a terminal multiplexer. Except I’ll still want a terminal multiplexer on servers, so I still need…

> Except I’ll still want a terminal multiplexer on servers

Biggest reason not to use a terminal multiplexer locally, imo: There is nothing worse than hitting Ctrl-b twice for every action when you're also using the muxer remotely.

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#18

Post by freedomben »

floren wrote: post #17
bee_rider wrote: post #10

The argument here seems to be: “the features you like about terminal multiplexers should be built into your terminal emulator, or your window manager, or I don’t see why they are really necessary.” Plus some complaints about influencers. Sure, I’ll just replace my perfectly functional window manager so I can avoid using a terminal multiplexer. Except I’ll still want a terminal multiplexer on servers, so I still need…

> Except I’ll still want a terminal multiplexer on servers Biggest reason not to use a terminal multiplexer locally, imo: There is nothing worse than hitting Ctrl-b twice for every action when you're also using the muxer remotely.

I just have Ctrl-a set as the primary, and on remote boxes (where I run a tmux which ends up running inside a pane in my local tmux) I use Ctrl-b. Took about 20 minutes to get the muscle memory to adjust for it and now 15 years later I'm still very happy with it.

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#19

Post by freedomben »

hyperman1 wrote: post #15

I started to use tmux on remote machines to stop them disconnecting me when the network changes or the laptop sleeps. (Damn you systemd for breaking that, too) Then I started multiple tmux panes remotely because it was great for dumping the long process monitoring next to the long process Then I started using tmux panes remotely for task switching. Then I started using tmux locally because I already knew all the keyb…

Just a side note, I think mosh is a much better tool for stopping the disconnections from network changes or laptop sleeps. It uses UDP under the hood instead of TCP so it seamlessly supports roaming (changing of IP addresses). Also brings some great performance improvements as well, especially when the remote process is dumping lots of text to standard out

Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop

#20

Post by mvdtnz »

bee_rider wrote: post #10

The argument here seems to be: “the features you like about terminal multiplexers should be built into your terminal emulator, or your window manager, or I don’t see why they are really necessary.” Plus some complaints about influencers. Sure, I’ll just replace my perfectly functional window manager so I can avoid using a terminal multiplexer. Except I’ll still want a terminal multiplexer on servers, so I still need…

I don't really buy the "I need multiple terminal sessions remotely" argument. It's just as easy to have multiple terminal emulator windows remoted into a server as it is to have multiple windows on a local session.
Post reply on HN