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

41–45 of 45 posts

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

#41

Post by choobacker »

bee_rider wrote: post #30
mvdtnz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No it wouldn’t be just as easy. Source: this is a description of my own workflow and preferences, so I’m the ultimate authority on the subject, haha.

> Source: this is a description of my own workflow and preferences, so I’m the ultimate authority on the subject, haha.

It's fine to choose your workflow by whatever criteria you decide, but on a post about workflows on a discussion forum, it's reasonable for mvdtnz to continue that discussion and not be laughed at for doing so.

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

#42

Post by choobacker »

simpaticoder wrote: post #3

Another great example of the eternal question, where the indirection go? Note that when browser tabs were invented this same debate happened.

+1. I think that about summarises it.

Window managers can plausibly already do a lot of what other software can do, yet in practice, popular workflows tend to assume very little from the window manager.

I try to avoid terminal multiplexers in favour of Sway/Emacs/dtach/SSH multiplexing, but I still often reach for tmux.

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

#43

Post by kristianp »

I tend to agree with this guy. I like using multiple windows or tabs in konsole and dont use tmux etc. If you're spending time sshing into remote machines tmux etc is the way to go. Although when I remote in I still don't use tmux or screen in general. I prefer using nohup for long running processes or even just keep the laptop from sleeping by plugging it in.

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

#44

Post by HackerThemAll »

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 agree that tmux or screen is a must-have tool for servers.

But you certainly didn't read it all, or at least to the point where he goes more in depth of how crazy the working with Zellij is. After reading the parts of the interview with its author I'm not even going to check its webpage or trying it.

tmux for the worth. Boring, old technology = stable, well defined, well tested, without cognitive overload. Because life in IT is already hard enough.

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

#45

Post by bee_rider »

HackerThemAll wrote: post #44
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 agree that tmux or screen is a must-have tool for servers. But you certainly didn't read it all, or at least to the point where he goes more in depth of how crazy the working with Zellij is. After reading the parts of the interview with its author I'm not even going to check its webpage or trying it. tmux for the worth. Boring, old technology = stable, well defined, well tested, without cognitive overload. Because…

Zellij does sound pretty bad.
Post reply on HN