Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] gnome-terminal performance
From: Chris Pickett (chris.pickett_AT_mail.mcgill.ca)
Date: Sat Jul 31 2004 - 22:57:17 EEST
Florin Andrei wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 12:30, Chris Pickett wrote:
>>Florin Andrei wrote:
>>>Am i crazy? Am i the only one who thinks that the current incarnation of
>>>gnome-terminal is slow and a resource hog?
>>No. I recently tried just about every terminal I could get my hands on,
>>and settled on using aterm like this:
>>aterm -bg black -fg white +sb -tr -sh 15 -sl 10000 -si -sk -fn 8x13 -ls
> Nice. But it seems focused on "cute" features such as transparent
> background and such.
> Are you sure it's the fastest, leanest one?
to the point where I would be happy with it forever. I haven't done any
real profiling for memory usage, but like I said, gnome-terminal was
atrocious on my system (750 MHz P3 256 Mb RAM (supposed to be 384 Mb)).
note that i don't like menubars or scrollbars or any of that crap, and
aterm lets you get rid of them easily (scrollbar is shift+pgup/pgdn or
shift+up/dn). usually i just work with 2 or three terminals full
screen, but occasionally unmaximize them. if i remember correctly, it's
like xterm except you can have a transparent background if you want, and
it's a bit lighter too.
just try it ... you can always get rid of it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Jul 31 2004 - 22:54:54 EEST