On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:25:32AM +0530, [email protected] wrote:
> Do I rightly infer from > http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/rxvt-unicode/doc/rxvt.7.pod#CONFIGUR > E_OPTIONS that --enable-pixbuf is better than --enable-afterimage in that a) > it does not increase urxvt's memory footprint as much and b) it does not > require any special library such as libafterimage to be installed? Well, gdk-pixbuf must be installed of course. > If so, are there any reasons against using --enable-pixbuf instead of > --enable-afterimage? No reason, gdk-pixbuf is actually the preferred image backend. Emanuele _______________________________________________ rxvt-unicode mailing list [email protected] http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rxvt-unicode
