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…
You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
21–30 of 45 posts
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#22From 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…
He's right though. Same for people who use TUI editors. Let's just call a spade a spade.
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#23From 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…
These children have zero knowledge of history or the craft itself, and I wish we could take away their computers.
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#24Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#25The 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
#26I 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…
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#27The 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
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
You can remap the prefix key...
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#29I 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…
Like, I'm current on-boarding some guys onto linux workstations and linux administration, and honestly, there are many ways of holding the duck and in a lot of situations, most ways of holding the duck work equally well. I can show you two or three ways I found to work well to hold the duck, but it's still up to you to find your perfect duck rotation.
Like, I use i3 as a tiling window manager. But if I'm honest, I don't really use the tiling that much. The most tiling I tend to use is having 2-3 shells eithes stacked as dishes or one tall and a stack of dishes next to each other. Otherwise it's usually a 50/50 split of screenspace of just a full screen window. I just can't focus on more at the same time anyway. The latter use case can be had by using gnome or KDE with about the same amount of key strokes. Tmux offers it equally well, as Kitty windows do.
Personally I enjoy i3 on my workstation because a few key bindings and workflows have found their way into my lizard brain, but the newer guys relying on other window managers aren't much slower for most use cases tbh.
Similar, I've used multiplexers, terminals with such features. Currently I'm experimenting with rofi and single-purpose named kitty-terminals to easily find or launch shell environments I need. But honestly, everything works with little difference in efficiency imo.
It's more about finding something that clicks for you than doing the dogmatically correct thing. That's the wonderful thing about a linux desktop, and also it's biggest curse.
Re: You Don't Need a Terminal Multiplexer on Your Desktop
#30The 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.
Source: this is a description of my own workflow and preferences, so I’m the ultimate authority on the subject, haha.