On Sun, 7 Jun 2015 04:40:47 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Well, yes, but vgacon is rather dated, now.
Never heard of a serial console? It's "dated" sure enough, but I for
one use them on a daily basis, and not by choice.
jer
Duncan wrote:
> The point you made here was console-based workflow, as quoted above,
> and that's what I addressed, arguing that even if was valid at some
> point, it's no longer the factor it once was.
For you, that is. Be aware that this creates your bias. You can't
extrapolate from your own sit
Andrew Savchenko posted on Mon, 08 Jun 2015 16:33:55 +0300 as excerpted:
> On Sun, 7 Jun 2015 04:40:47 + (UTC) Duncan wrote:
>> Andrew Savchenko posted on Sat, 06 Jun 2015 20:36:13 +0300 as
>> excerpted:
>>
>> > It will never be finished, because console-based workflow is the most
>> > effici
On Sun, 7 Jun 2015 04:40:47 + (UTC) Duncan wrote:
> Andrew Savchenko posted on Sat, 06 Jun 2015 20:36:13 +0300 as excerpted:
>
> > On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 18:35:41 +0600 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> >> > * linewidth >> 80 (why do we have this short limit still in 2015)
> >>
> >> Actually, I
On 07/06/15 18:54, Allan Wegan wrote:
>> [1] Of course, 320x108 chars /is/ with a 42-inch TV as a monitor, but
>> it's not exactly tiny print, either. I sit farther away from it than
>> many people sit from their monitor. But even half of that is 160
>> chars width, which is what I used to use on
> [1] Of course, 320x108 chars /is/ with a 42-inch TV as a monitor, but
> it's not exactly tiny print, either. I sit farther away from it than
> many people sit from their monitor. But even half of that is 160
> chars width, which is what I used to use on my 21-inch.
Now 160 sounds like two perf
Andrew Savchenko posted on Sat, 06 Jun 2015 20:36:13 +0300 as excerpted:
> On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 18:35:41 +0600 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>> > * linewidth >> 80 (why do we have this short limit still in 2015)
>>
>> Actually, I dislike that too, but the reason is simple: some people
>> still
