Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

baslinux - Re: [BL] icewm vs. virtual terminals

baslinux AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Baslinux mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: qwms-avib AT dea.spamcon.org
  • To: baslinux AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [BL] icewm vs. virtual terminals
  • Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 17:11:26 +0000

James Miller wrote:
>
> Linux typically allows 7 such virtual terminals,
> while BL2 seems to be limited to 5.

The ramdisk version has 3. The HD version has 4.
Slackware (I think) has 6.

> Having run into situations lately where I've needed
> to shutdown apps to free up a virtual terminal

Feel free to add more if you wish. Just edit /etc/inittab
and add c5, c6, etc.

> I've begun to wonder what the relative advantages/
> disadvantages of running console apps in this way
> are as opposed to simply starting icewm and running
> those programs under xterminals there.

Virtual terminals are significantly faster than xterms.

> Steven has noted in the past that, at least in the
> case of X apps (Netscape was his focus, I believe),
> running such an app in a virtual terminal using xinit
> was less efficient than running it under icewm.

The virtual terminal was not the issue. In one case
I ran Netscape (from .xinitrc) on X without a wm.
In the other, I ran icewm (from .xinitrc) and Netscape
ran on that. The use of a wm seemed to make Netscape
more stable.

Cheers,
Steven





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page