Yeah, pretty much. I got tired of going "ctrl-a a a a a <space>" to change screens. Anyone here know the Telnet Song, by Guy Steele and Knuth? Screen is the modern incarnation. :-)
These days, my standard .*profile finshes up with a prompt asking me whether I want to run screen or not, and executes it as "-R -DD" if I say I do. I'd certainly be happy to put a screen wrapper in my profile if it meant I could attach arbitrary processes. On 5/16/06, Joe Zbiciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Phil, I tried something like that once and found it too annoying. Mainly, I ran into the oddball sorts of TERMCAP / backspace / etc. issues too often when logging in from "strange" hosts. Also, what happens when you ssh from host A to host B? If every session I have open is runs screen, it really messes with ssh'ing host to host. It's those sort of issues that lead me to desire a "screen-ultra-lite" that is always safe to fork into. Some parts of it become less annoying if screen sprouts the ability to hand FDs between instances of itself on the local host. The nested-instance issue, though, only starts to become sane if screen learns how to detect the nested instance and has a protocol for giving the illusion that the top-level and nested instances are a single instance. (That actually would be really cool.) (BTW, I apologize for the new Outlook-style message quoting and formatting. I need to see if I can somehow switch the new Yahoo email beta to do more traditional-style email quoting and formatting.) Regards, --Joe We sell Spatulas, and that's all!http://spatula-city.org/~im14u2c/ http://sdk-1600.spatula-city.org/ http://intyos.spatula-city.org/ ----- Original Message ---- From: Phil!Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: screen-users@gnu.org Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 10:46:17 AM Subject: Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one * Joe Zbiciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-16 06:34 -0700]: > If screen develops the capability to import TTY FDs from another > process, then the answer may be as simple as a wrapper around your shell > that does little more than hold the FDs for your TTY, and pipes them > through. But then you'd have to manually set up the wrapper to run on all of your processes. As long as you're going to the trouble, why not just make the leap and run everything in screen? That's what I do, and it means that I never have to worry that something might not be detachable.
-- Aaron Davies _______________________________________________ screen-users mailing list screen-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/screen-users
