"Colin R. Telmer" wrote: > Sorry to continue a long thread, but you have now peaked my curiousity - > why is the point of rxvt to avoid xrdb? Is that part of the reason it uses > less memory? Curiousity killed the cat... Cheers.
My understanding, which was supported by the man-page quote elsewhere in this thread, is that rxvt reads resource *files*, but doesn't coomunicate with the resource database (a major memory suck) Stephen --- "Normality is a statistical illusion." -- me -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
