On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:42:21 +0200
Tobias Bengfort wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07/09/2020 09.13, Alexander Krotov wrote:
> > Maybe a better solution is to send XOFF (see
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_flow_control), but I am also
> > not sure how other programs react to it. They will probabl
Hi,
On 07/09/2020 09.13, Alexander Krotov wrote:
> Maybe a better solution is to send XOFF (see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_flow_control), but I am also
> not sure how other programs react to it. They will probably block
> waiting for the write(2) syscall to return instead of continu
On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 08:21:45AM +0200, Tobias Bengfort wrote:
> For this to work it would need to be supported in several places:
>
> - Window managers could set _NET_WM_STATE_HIDDEN
> - Terminal emulators and multiplexers could set the terminal size to 0,0
> - Applications need to actually use
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 10:13:26 +0300
Alexander Krotov wrote:
> > What you could do is to patch a terminal to allow programs to because
> > paused via SIGSTOP when invisible and continued via SIGCONT when
> > visible. Then your program would only need to write some string to
> > the terminal when it
> What you could do is to patch a terminal to allow programs to because
> paused via SIGSTOP when invisible and continued via SIGCONT when
> visible. Then your program would only need to write some string to
> the terminal when it starts and when it terminates. Multiplexers
> could however become a
