On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:21:53PM +0100, Nick wrote: > Sounds great, good job on this. I haven't read about Tox in any > depth, so don't know how lovely or otherwise it is as a protocol. > What do you folks think?
I'd say pretty much sensible. The API is nice too. > Quoth FRIGN: > > Based on ratox, TLH and I will work on a set of scripts/client > > rather similar to hysteria[5] with tmux and other tools > > (pv, rlwrap, ...), once ratox is more or less feature-complete > > in version 0.2. > > I'm not sure how I feel about using tmux as a wrapper to all this, > like hysteria. After all, we have a good X window manager, I would > have thought it would be better to make use of that. Is there a > reason you're planning to use tmux rather than dwm / X for your > wrapper client thing? persistence using dtach or similar seems less > important when you can do ssh tunneling as easily as you can with > ratox. dwm with the fifo patch[0] could work fine. I generally work in tmux that's why hysteria is done like that. Also it is mostly running on a remote machine where I don't have X. You can tunnel your traffic but when your machine is shut down you are offline :) [0] http://dwm.suckless.org/patches/dwmfifo
