cool! thanks for the research-- it's the best reply i've gotten in a while!
cheers,
_J
On 7/26/08, Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> James wrote:
> > hello,
> > just wanted to know why the following command gives:
> >
> > $ screen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James wrote:
> hello,
> just wanted to know why the following command gives:
>
> $ screen -RRx
> There is no screen to be attached.
>
> whereas typing:
>
> $ screen -xRR
>
> gives a new screen session. (or attaches to an existing one with multiuser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe Zbiciak wrote:
> Micah,
>
> This may be a silly question, but how does "screen" decide that the
> attaching terminal supports capturing mouse events? It could be that
> nano says it's interested, but screen thinks they're not available.
>
> I
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 06:11:33PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> * What about the bloat?
> Screw the bloat, there are larger full-blown window managers around :-)
I don't think that the existence of bloat in *some* solutions for an
unrelated problem domain is an excuse to add bloat to Screen.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 01:01:10AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> "M-x term" within Emacs pretty much fits the bill.
> Only a dumb terminal, though :(
> http://hannes.saeurebad.de/images/no-recursive-emacs.png
M-x term is not the same as M-x shell. The former provides VT220 (or
thereabouts) emu
hello,
just wanted to know why the following command gives:
$ screen -RRx
There is no screen to be attached.
whereas typing:
$ screen -xRR
gives a new screen session. (or attaches to an existing one with multiuser mode)
at the moment i'm using the second command as my "always run screen
like t
Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Micah Cowan wrote:
>>> To be honest, implementing a Screen within Emacs makes almost as much
>>> sense as giving Screen Emacs-like scriptability
>>
>> Come to think of it, that functionality more-or-less already
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Joe Zbiciak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This may be a silly question, but how does "screen" decide that the
> attaching terminal supports capturing mouse events? It could be that
> nano says it's interested, but screen thinks they're not available.
>
> I'm no ex
This is the point of the conversation where I butt my head in and
look stupid. :-)
- Original Message
Micah Cowan wrote:
> >> Wait, where are you running screen? My assumption was that you be
> >> running it ON prime.gushi.org, not before you ssh in.
>
> Right. I'm doing both.
>
> >> W
Hi,
Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Micah Cowan wrote:
To be honest, implementing a Screen within Emacs makes almost as much
sense as giving Screen Emacs-like scriptability
>>> Come to think o
Hi,
Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Micah Cowan wrote:
>> To be honest, implementing a Screen within Emacs makes almost as much
>> sense as giving Screen Emacs-like scriptability
>
> Come to think of it, that functionality more-or-less already exists;
> "M-x term" within Emacs pretty mu
Hi Tom,
"Tom Scogland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All of this is pretty correct, except that the gnu emacs we know was lisp
> with a C core for a long time because redraw was impossible to write
> efficiently enough in lisp for some reason. As such, when the program
> entered that state, ever
Hi,
Sadrul Habib Chowdhury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi. I started working on a lua script loader for screen last night. I am
> quite happy with the progress so far. I would like to know what people
> think about this kind of work. I discussed about this briefly with Micah
> last night, and h
13 matches
Mail list logo
