Thorsten Kampe writes:
* Reid Thompson (Tue, 08 May 2007 07:00:45 -0400)
Charles Wilson wrote:
Sigh. cygwin's rxvt is not broken. It works for me, and about 2000
others.
+1 --I have been using cygwin rxvt for several years (Xwin and Win) --
has
Charles Wilson wrote:
Sigh. cygwin's rxvt is not broken. It works for me, and about 2000
others.
+1 --I have been using cygwin rxvt for several years (Xwin and Win) --
has fulfilled every terminal need that I have.
kudos to the 'maintainer'??.
--
Unsubscribe info:
* Reid Thompson (Tue, 08 May 2007 07:00:45 -0400)
Charles Wilson wrote:
Sigh. cygwin's rxvt is not broken. It works for me, and about 2000
others.
+1 --I have been using cygwin rxvt for several years (Xwin and Win) --
has fulfilled every terminal need that I have.
kudos to the
Hi all,
Thanks a lot to Thomas Dickey, Thorsten Kampe and Charles Wilson for
taking time to answer my question. I'm very sorry if it lead to some
argument, that has never been my intent. All I wanted to know was
something like a side-by-side points, such as I use *1 because it has
this
On Mon, 7 May 2007, Gustavo Seabra wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks a lot to Thomas Dickey, Thorsten Kampe and Charles Wilson for taking
time to answer my question. I'm very sorry if it lead to some argument, that
has never been my intent. All I wanted to know was something like a
side-by-side points,
[consolidating two subthreads]
Thomas Dickey wrote:
Not so fast, Thomas. I did not and do not agree with your previous
posts: neither of your messages claimed that upstream rxvt has no
maintainer. (If they did, then I would have agreed with that.)
Your messages claimed that rxvt had no
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off this
mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an EX-terminal. The terminal
is terminal.
thanks for agreeing with me. It has no maintainer.
Frankly, I prefer rxvt-unicode on
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off
this mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an EX-terminal.
The terminal is terminal.
thanks for agreeing with me. It has no maintainer.
Not so
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off this
mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an EX-terminal. The
terminal is terminal.
thanks for agreeing
* Thomas Dickey (Sun, 6 May 2007 10:49:23 -0400 (EDT))
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off this
mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
You are confusing things. Quoting you: 'support is relative. There's
apparently no X maintainer [...]'. If you don't 'care for the role of
cygwin maintainer' then that's obviously nonsense as X is maintained
upstream.
not at all: X upstream doesn't
* Thomas Dickey (Sun, 6 May 2007 13:36:31 -0400 (EDT))
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
You are confusing things. Quoting you: 'support is relative. There's
apparently no X maintainer [...]'. If you don't 'care for the role of
cygwin maintainer' then that's obviously nonsense as X
Hi all,
I just wonder what is the current status of terminals for X in Cygwin. I
currently use xterm, but I've seen people using rxvt and mrxvt. Also, I
heard that rxvt is actually currently supported in Cygwin, something
that xterm apparently isn't.
Is anybody using rxvt, mrxvt or
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Gustavo Seabra wrote:
Hi all,
I just wonder what is the current status of terminals for X in Cygwin. I
currently use xterm, but I've seen people using rxvt and mrxvt. Also, I heard
that rxvt is actually currently supported in Cygwin, something that xterm
apparently
* Thomas Dickey (Sat, 5 May 2007 10:12:18 -0400 (EDT))
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Gustavo Seabra wrote:
I just wonder what is the current status of terminals for X in Cygwin. I
currently use xterm, but I've seen people using rxvt and mrxvt. Also, I
heard
that rxvt is actually currently
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
* Thomas Dickey (Sat, 5 May 2007 10:12:18 -0400 (EDT))
On Sat, 5 May 2007, Gustavo Seabra wrote:
I just wonder what is the current status of terminals for X in Cygwin. I
currently use xterm, but I've seen people using rxvt and mrxvt. Also, I heard
16 matches
Mail list logo
