* pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) @ 2009-01-11 4:56 Christopher Faylor 2009-01-11 9:17 ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2009-01-11 4:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin I apologize for sidetracking the MinTTY thread. It was bugging me too much to see the same argument repeated a couple of days after they were already discussed. (I blame the choklat stout: http://www.southerntierbrewing.com/beers.html) As I've said, I think MinTTY is a nice program, getting better all of the time. It likely can't replace the current default cygwin shell and that's a pity. We could use something that was actively maintained with more of a linux look and feel. Just to contribute something useful: Chuck Wilson, if you are reading this, am I correct in assuming that you don't enjoy maintaining the Windows version of rxvt? If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? If not, there is no harm in keeping two packages in the distribution. I was just trying to lighten your load if you were interested. The other thing that I've always wanted was some way for the user to choose what they want to run without running cygwin.bat by hand. I think that would mean setup.exe modification though. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 4:56 pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) Christopher Faylor @ 2009-01-11 9:17 ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Yaakov (Cygwin/X) @ 2009-01-11 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Christopher Faylor wrote: > Just to contribute something useful: Chuck Wilson, if you are reading > this, am I correct in assuming that you don't enjoy maintaining the > Windows version of rxvt? If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in > favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? Or just switch rxvt to the regular X11 version w/o all the libW11 hackery? Yaakov Cygwin/X -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEAREIAAYFAklpksMACgkQpiWmPGlmQSP9KwCfcRpbeWRn2zJXiwuWQDJkgNeL 5J4AnRvIXPpUswp6a6UNTxGMRudYIf19 =KICh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 4:56 pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) Christopher Faylor 2009-01-11 9:17 ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X) @ 2009-01-11 20:53 ` Charles Wilson 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe ` (3 more replies) 1 sibling, 4 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Charles Wilson @ 2009-01-11 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Christopher Faylor wrote: > Just to contribute something useful: Chuck Wilson, if you are reading > this, am I correct in assuming that you don't enjoy maintaining the > Windows version of rxvt? Well, it's my main terminal. I tried MinTTY and I'm not sure yet whether it will supplant rxvt for my personal use, but it shows promise. > If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in > favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? > > If not, there is no harm in keeping two packages in the distribution. I > was just trying to lighten your load if you were interested. I'd lean toward keeping both in the distro (mainly because I'd hate to see a never-ending flood of "where'd rxvt go?" queries. That'd be more of a pain than the relatively infrequent updates that rxvt gets). I'd certainly be one of the first encouraging new (and old) cygwin users to try MinTTY if they dislike the standard cmd console, don't want to use X, and are aware of the pty issue. > The other thing that I've always wanted was some way for the user to > choose what they want to run without running cygwin.bat by hand. I > think that would mean setup.exe modification though. You mean like another setup.exe pane (or option in an existing pane) to select the terminal that should be started by the "default" Cygwin link in the Start Menu? That's an interesting idea... Consolidated reply to Yaakov: > Or just switch rxvt to the regular X11 version w/o all the libW11 hackery? At one time, I toyed with the idea of creating two different rxvt packages (rxvt-W and rxvt-X), where neither was "split personality" but only operated in the specified windowing environment. Further, rxvt-W would be relatively stripped down (to only what libW11 supports, as currently), but rxvt-X would have all the bells and whistles turned on. The transparent "use X or Windows GDI" switching would be handled by the checkX program. Part of the reason for this 'diabolical plan': http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2006-03/msg00119.html "IMO the split personality is a bad idea: the worst of both worlds. rxvt is configured to support only the least common denominator options, those that BOTH modes can each support. So, no xft support ever. InheritPixmap is, err, at-your-own-risk. Plus, the underlying [builtin] W11 library is just as moribund as rxvt -- and the wrapper system means ALL library calls in EITHER mode must be handled by dlsym()." A wrinkle: the 'all singing all dancing' version of rxvt-X might require/support certain .Xdefaults options that the -W version doesn't, or a user might want them to be different. To support this, the -W version (or the -X version) would need a different XAPPRES name. But making this change would break existing setups. I never figured out how to handle this issue cleanly, which is part of why the idea died out. (The other was the complete lack of interest I got regarding a standalone, limited-functionality libW11). http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2006-03/msg00122.html http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2006-03/msg00121.html http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2006-03/msg00120.html One way to side step all of that is to partially implement it: new package: rxvt-X, all singing, all dancing rxvt becomes a wrapper package, using checkX. When X is detected, it launches rxvt-X. However, if X is not detected, it launches MinTTY. Later, if there is enough demand (complaints?) I can look at creating rxvt-W (with an alternate XAPPRES name) that is windows-only (maybe with the external libW11, maybe just like at present with the builtin libW11) -- but no split-personality. Those poor sods that insist on using it can (1) change the rxvt (wrapper) configuration to launch rxvt-W in windows mode instead of MinTTY (2) explicitly transfer their windows-compatible .Xdefault settings from the existing Rxvt: XAPPRES to the new RxvtW: XAPPRES prefix. However, in the meantime nothing actually *breaks* -- it just looks different. We might get a flood of "I launched rxvt and got MinTTY instead" which would be almost as bad as "where'd rxvt go?" but... cgf: hmm...how's that for "lightening my load"? <g> Actually, this plan ^^^^^^ is a lot of work up front but would probably be extremely low-maintianence after that. -- Chuck -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson @ 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-11 23:33 ` Charles Wilson 2009-01-12 0:37 ` Andrew DeFaria ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Andy Koppe @ 2009-01-11 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Charles Wilson wrote: > Christopher Faylor wrote: >> If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in >> favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? >> >> If not, there is no harm in keeping two packages in the distribution. I >> was just trying to lighten your load if you were interested. > > I'd lean toward keeping both in the distro Same here. > (mainly because I'd hate to > see a never-ending flood of "where'd rxvt go?" queries. That'd be more > of a pain than the relatively infrequent updates that rxvt gets). And I'd be dreading the inevitable demands to implement every single feature and option that rxvt provides. > You mean like another setup.exe pane (or option in an existing pane) to > select the terminal that should be started by the "default" Cygwin link > in the Start Menu? That's an interesting idea... How about just providing Start Menu shortcuts for all installed terminals in a "Cygwin" folder, much like Yaakov has done in MinTTY's cygports package? The user could always copy them to more easily accessible places as needed, or just rely on the recently-used list. >> Or just switch rxvt to the regular X11 version w/o all the libW11 hackery? Bypassing the X protocol by implementing Xlib directly on Win32 does seem rather a good idea in principle at least. How come it hasn't been used more widely? Andy -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe @ 2009-01-11 23:33 ` Charles Wilson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Charles Wilson @ 2009-01-11 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Andy Koppe wrote: > How about just providing Start Menu shortcuts for all installed > terminals in a "Cygwin" folder, much like Yaakov has done in MinTTY's > cygports package? The user could always copy them to more easily > accessible places as needed, or just rely on the recently-used list. That could work, too -- and wouldn't require setup.exe changes. But it requires action on the part of the cygwin maintainers of terminals, like...err. Oh, yeah. me. >>> Or just switch rxvt to the regular X11 version w/o all the libW11 >>> hackery? > > Bypassing the X protocol by implementing Xlib directly on Win32 does > seem rather a good idea in principle at least. How come it hasn't been > used more widely? There have been several efforts over the years. All have failed AFAICT. The most widely used version -- the libW11 distributed with rxvt on both cygwin and msys -- is extremely limited in functionality. It supports ONLY enough of X to satisfy the very minimal demands of rxvt. See, the whole reason rxvt was created, on unix, in the first place was as a replacement for xterm that *didn't* use the Xt toolkit. rxvt used Xlib -- and only Xlib -- directly. Thus, it was considered "faster" and more "lightweight" (whether that is or was actually true is another question). It also used only a small subset of the calls in the Xlib library (maybe 5%) -- so a suitable libW11 was smaller and simpler to write. However, that library is mostly useless for anything more demanding -- which is why only rxvt uses it. Other, more comprehensive efforts [1], also seemed to die off for one reason or another: including mine. It's rather hard to "widely use" something that is incomplete and broken. <g> -- Chuck [1] Here's a copy of some of the documentation I put in the libW11 ITP, several years ago. The section concerning XCB is new. Taxonomy of libW11: ============================================================ ntxlib (1992 : unknown) ---------------------------------------------------------- ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/developr/drg/UNIX-to-Windows/Ports/Xlib Very rudimentary. rxvt's W11 component (1999 : SteveO) ---------------------------------------------------------- This was derived from ntxlib by SteveO and absorbed in modified form into rxvt-2.7.x. This version is what allows rxvt to work in "native windowing mode" for both cygwin and MinGW/MSYS. The original version has disappeared from the web, but the wayback machine has it: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.io.com/~bub/rxvt (Oldest available source code 03 Jun 2001): http://web.archive.org/web/20030625063023/http://www.io.com/~bub/dnload/rxvt-2.7.2-6-src.tar.gz (Matching binary 03 Jun 2001): http://web.archive.org/web/20030625063023/http://www.io.com/~bub/dnload/rxvt-2.7.2-6.tar.gz rxvt is part of the official cygwin distribution, so current source code can be obtained from the cygwin mirrors. Try http://mirrors.kernel.org/sources.redhat.com/cygwin/release/rxvt/ rxvt's W11 is tightly tied to SteveO's wrapper system which allows rxvt to use either W11 or X11 depending on the DISPLAY variable. This is possible because rxvt uses very little of X11's capabililty; rxvt-W11 provides maybe 5% of the functionality of X11. The drawback of rxvt-W11 is that the wrapper code must be compiled-in to the client, and the W11 "x11-ish" header must be used. You can't compile against 'stock' X11 headers and just link to the rxvt-W11 library, nor simply "drop in" a libW11 DLL in place of the X11 xlib DLL. That's the goal of the projects below. NOTE: mrxvt -- a tabbed version of rxvt -- also supports/uses/includes? this version of libW11. This guy: http://www.nabble.com/libW11-enabled-mrxvt-0.5.4-20080913-td19483005.html who further modifies mrxvt to work with chinese encodings, has also modified rxvt-W11 to support that. He has not yet published those changes. Because he distributes this modified libW11.dll -- which is linked against cygwin -- it falls under the GPL and he needs to do publish those patches, but I haven't tried to contact him about that. libW11 [SourceForge version] (2001 : Don Becker "psyon" ) ---------------------------------------------------------- This project was derived from rxvt-W11, with the intention of being a simple drop-in replacement for the Xlib DLL. Development has stalled, and the most recent version doesn't actually work -- the primary developer did a CVS dump of his current state when he abandoned the project. Too bad his 'current state' was broken: "I haven't gotten everything from the old code into the new code yet. I'm implementing as needed right now." But that never happened. Thus, the most recent official version that actually works dates back to Dec 2001. Some have had luck with the Jan 2005 version but I'm not one of them. http://libw11.sourceforge.net/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/libw11/ I don't believe the design decision to "replace" cygX11-6.dll with a DLL of the same name with libW11 internals was a good one, because it means your entire X11 installation would be forced to use libW11 -- even though libW11 is FAR from complete. Thus, most of your apps will break. Thus, I believe it is better to compile this library into its own, distinct, DLL and deliberately link a custom (native-windowing-mode) version of your app to libW11 instead of libX11. The downside of my approach is you do not have access to the toolkits, (e.g. cygXt still uses cygX11, and there is no cygXt-W11). However, as most of those add-on libraries did NOT, in fact, work properly with W11 under them, this is no big loss in my opinion. Architecturally, libW11 is compiled using a custom set of local header files, that basically contain just those parts of the official X11 headers necessary to compile libW11 itself. These local headers are NOT installed. Instead, client apps should use the official headers, but simply link against libW11. That is, -I/usr/X11R6/include -L/usr/lib/W11 Unlike the rxvt-W11 version, this library spawns a message handling thread which intercepts all Windows messages, converts them into XEvents, and then feeds those XEvents to the client app's message loop. (The rxvt-W11 version had no separate thread. Instead, it provided a hook where the client app could insert a handler into the rxvt-W11 library's message loop. This deviation means that application code must be modified from its pure-X version to work properly with rxvt-W11). libW11 [free.fr version] (2005 : Samuel Vinson "samuelv") ---------------------------------------------------------- This version is a cooperative fork of libW11-sourceforge. One of the participants added a lot of functionality and re-architected the the include files. However, Sam's changes were based on the libW11-sourceforge code BEFORE Don did his CVS dump. So merging is/was going to be quite tedious -- and few of Sam's changes made it into the sourceforge CVS before Don abandoned the project. There was also a difference of opinion in architecture, which caused some friction. http://libw11.free.fr/ http://libw11.free.fr/downloads/index.html Sam's version retains the old rxvt-W11 message handling: no extra threads, but apps must explicitly "hook" in. One interesting change is the use of "real" X11 headers. Sam's code has pristine copies of the X11 headers needed to build his libW11 -- but ONLY those that are actually needed by his code. Thus, rather than cut-n-paste specific function and type declarations into custom headers, Sam copies entire headers from the official x.org include files. Unfortunately, Sam's code does not appear to be complete either. libW11 [cygwin version] (2006 : Charles Wilson) ---------------------------------------------------------- ALSO not complete. Based on libW11-sourceforge, with mods derived from libW11.free.fr and rxvt-W11, as well as custom changes. The starting point for this version was the (broken) 20050610 CVS snapshot from sourceforge. Thus, it uses the separate-thread model for Windows Message conversion. It retains the customized local header files. However, it incorporates color handling from free.fr, and pixmap handling from rxvt-W11. At present, all test code appears to work, including an xlib-only PNG viewer. Additionally, an xlib-only XPM viewer also appears to work (not the sxpm provided with the xpm distribution; that requires Xt). Finally, a partially working version of rxvt-2.7.10 is possible using this library. Known failures: * no clipboard support * 100% CPU usage What works: * colors, text, command I/O * background pixmap * "inheritPixmap" pseudo-transparentcy [partial: scaling incorrect] So, at present, rxvt-2.7.10 using libW11 is a step backwards from rxvt-2.7.10 using its own bundled W11. However, it is my hope that with assistance, libW11 may eventually surpass that version, and even provide sufficient support for a native-windowing rxvt-unicode. XCB windows port ---------------------------------------------------------- Recently, X.org changed the underlying design of the libX11 implementation, so that it now represents a thin API-compliant wrapper around an underlying XCB (X protocol C Binding) library. Thus, an alternative solution to the above libW11 is to instead create an XCB library that directly targets the Win32 graphics subsystem. Then, link the (wrapper) libX11 (renamed libW11) against this libXCBw32gdi library. Presumably this would be easier than a non-XCB-based libW11, because XCB is smaller and simpler -- and presumably easier to port. There have been (MAYBE: [*]) two public efforts to to this: Jeetu Golani http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2008-May/003538.html Michael DOUBEZ http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2008-May/003522.html But those patches were never accepted upstream, and doubtless need many changes before working with current XCB. [*] I haven't look at the patches, at all. It is unclear what either of these two authors means by "native win32 port": (1) a standard port of the library so that it compiles on win32, but still implements the X protocol and thus requires a running X-server to actually display the stuff, or (2) an library *called* XCB that is API-compliant to the "real" libXCB, but rather than formatting messages and handling the communication with a (local? remote?) Xserver, instead directly calls the Win32 graphics subsystem. If 1), then this is no big deal IMO: Colin Harrison provides those (for a fee) over at http://www.straightrunning.com/XmingNotes/. On cygwin, we already have that, as well: cygxcb-1.dll is a port of the XCB library that runs on windows, but "needs" an Xserver. If 2), then it's a pretty big deal -- but as I said above, even then the patches will need work to operate correctly with current XCB. IMO, a libW11 port based on a win32-native libXCB in the (2) sense, above, with as many associated X libraries recompiled and relinked and verified working as possible -- and RENAMED so as not to conflict with existing cygX* libs -- would be a nice Google SoC project for someone. Obviously this would be easier if done in the cygwin arena rather than truly "native" (e.g. mingw) land. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe @ 2009-01-12 0:37 ` Andrew DeFaria 2009-01-12 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 2009-01-12 0:42 ` Christopher Faylor 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin 3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Andrew DeFaria @ 2009-01-12 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Charles Wilson wrote: > Later, if there is enough demand (complaints?) I can look at creating > rxvt-W (with an alternate XAPPRES name) that is windows-only (maybe > with the external libW11, maybe just like at present with the builtin > libW11) -- but no split-personality. How about creating a rxvt-W that uses Window's style console I/O instead of a pty? (I have no idea of how difficult or simple that might be). -- Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com> Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-12 0:37 ` Andrew DeFaria @ 2009-01-12 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2009-01-12 0:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 04:32:40PM -0700, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > Charles Wilson wrote: >> Later, if there is enough demand (complaints?) I can look at creating >> rxvt-W (with an alternate XAPPRES name) that is windows-only (maybe with >> the external libW11, maybe just like at present with the builtin libW11) >> -- but no split-personality. > How about creating a rxvt-W that uses Window's style console I/O instead of > a pty? (I have no idea of how difficult or simple that might be). If it was even moderately difficult I would have just implemented ptys using console I/O long ago. Microsoft doesn't want you to use consoles for much and it shows. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-12 0:37 ` Andrew DeFaria @ 2009-01-12 0:42 ` Christopher Faylor 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin 3 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2009-01-12 0:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 03:22:14PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >> Just to contribute something useful: Chuck Wilson, if you are reading >> this, am I correct in assuming that you don't enjoy maintaining the >> Windows version of rxvt? > >Well, it's my main terminal. I tried MinTTY and I'm not sure yet whether >it will supplant rxvt for my personal use, but it shows promise. > >> If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in >> favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? >> >> If not, there is no harm in keeping two packages in the distribution. I >> was just trying to lighten your load if you were interested. > >I'd lean toward keeping both in the distro (mainly because I'd hate to >see a never-ending flood of "where'd rxvt go?" queries. That'd be more >of a pain than the relatively infrequent updates that rxvt gets). Yeah, that would be annoying. Does rxvt actually get updated these days? I visited rxvt.org but that site obviously hasn't seen any obvious love in a long time. >I'd certainly be one of the first encouraging new (and old) cygwin users >to try MinTTY if they dislike the standard cmd console, don't want to >use X, and are aware of the pty issue. > >> The other thing that I've always wanted was some way for the user to >> choose what they want to run without running cygwin.bat by hand. I >> think that would mean setup.exe modification though. > >You mean like another setup.exe pane (or option in an existing pane) to >select the terminal that should be started by the "default" Cygwin link >in the Start Menu? That's an interesting idea... Something like that. I used the word "running" too many times above but what I was thinking was that we should use run login.exe on the desktop and it should pick your startup program of choice. >cgf: hmm...how's that for "lightening my load"? <g> Actually, this plan >^^^^^^ is a lot of work up front but would probably be extremely >low-maintianence after that. But it sounds like a nice way to go... cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2009-01-12 0:42 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin 2009-01-12 12:35 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-12 16:34 ` cgf 3 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Paul McFerrin @ 2009-01-12 5:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 03:22:14PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >Well, it's my main terminal. I tried MinTTY and I'm not sure yet whether >it will supplant rxvt for my personal use, but it shows promise. > I've been using rxvt for years as my main terminal and just tried using minTTY and really prefer not to use it. You see I'm and old man with poor eye sight. The visual attributes of minTTY aren't the same that I use with rxvt. The Lucida Console (white foreground on black) has less contrast as the same font on rxvt. If I make it bold, it approaches nearly the same brightness as rxvt but a little more blurry. These featurea don't go with poor vision. I made the mistake of updating rxvt before and I learned no more updates, please. Maybe it will help someone what options I use to make my statements more clearer: rxvt --backspacekey ^H -sbt 15 -fg white -bg black -geometry +75+80 -sr -title "TTY$tty$label" -tn ansi -sl 3000 -fn 'Lucida Console-12' -e ksh & My 2 cents worth, no more. -Paul -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin @ 2009-01-12 12:35 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-12 16:34 ` cgf 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Andy Koppe @ 2009-01-12 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Paul McFerrin wrote: > I've been using rxvt for years as my main terminal and just tried using > minTTY and really prefer not to use it. You see I'm and old man with > poor eye sight. The visual attributes of minTTY aren't the same that I > use with rxvt. The Lucida Console (white foreground on black) has less > contrast as the same font on rxvt. If I make it bold, it approaches > nearly the same brightness as rxvt but a little more blurry. These > featurea don't go with poor vision. The text foreground colour can be changed on the "Looks" page of the options. The default is a light grey (191,191,191) in order to leave room for the bright attribute. Setting it to proper white (255,255,255) might make a difference. Regarding blurriness, it might be worth trying the different font smoothing methods (none, anti-aliased, "ClearType"). Andy -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: MinTTY "vs" rxvt (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin 2009-01-12 12:35 ` Andy Koppe @ 2009-01-12 16:34 ` cgf 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: cgf @ 2009-01-12 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:00:28PM -0500, Paul McFerrin wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 03:22:14PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: >> Christopher Faylor wrote: Not sure what I'm doing here. >> Well, it's my main terminal. I tried MinTTY and I'm not sure yet whether >> it will supplant rxvt for my personal use, but it shows promise. >> > I've been using rxvt for years as my main terminal and just tried using > minTTY and really prefer not to use it. You see I'm and old man with poor > eye sight. The visual attributes of minTTY aren't the same that I use with > rxvt. The Lucida Console (white foreground on black) has less contrast as > the same font on rxvt. If I make it bold, it approaches nearly the same > brightness as rxvt but a little more blurry. These featurea don't go with > poor vision. > > I made the mistake of updating rxvt before and I learned no more updates, > please. Maybe it will help someone what options I use to make my > statements more clearer: > rxvt --backspacekey ^H -sbt 15 -fg white -bg black -geometry +75+80 -sr > -title "TTY$tty$label" -tn ansi -sl 3000 -fn 'Lucida Console-12' -e ksh & > My 2 cents worth, no more. You obviously have customized rxvt. I don't see why MinTTY would be any different. And, if you are not going to be updating rxvt it doesn't really matter what happens with the distribution since you wouldn't see it anyway. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-01-12 16:17 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-01-11 4:56 pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) Christopher Faylor 2009-01-11 9:17 ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X) 2009-01-11 20:53 ` MinTTY "vs" rxvt " Charles Wilson 2009-01-11 22:18 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-11 23:33 ` Charles Wilson 2009-01-12 0:37 ` Andrew DeFaria 2009-01-12 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 2009-01-12 0:42 ` Christopher Faylor 2009-01-12 5:14 ` Paul McFerrin 2009-01-12 12:35 ` Andy Koppe 2009-01-12 16:34 ` cgf
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).