I made a simple status bar for myself. It's possible other people may like it.
Description, instructions, and download at
https://lee-phillips.org/estadobarpage/
By the way: some other terminal programs do not have this problem. For example,
xfce4-terminal retains the information in its window under dwm resizing.
However, it uses three times the memory of either st or xterm.
I compiled the current version of this scroll program and used it with both st
and xterm. It had no effect. The programs behaved as before, with lines getting
erased after window resizing.
I also prefer to use dwm to manage my terminal windows rather than a
multiplexer, so I am keenly intereste
> No effect at all? It is at least supposed to allow you to scroll back. I
> suspect something is wrong with the way you're trying to use scroll.
Sorry, I think I already had a scrollback patch applied to st, so I could
already scroll back (and I forgot that that patch was in there). So my mes
> What I did to make it work is to run "./scroll" in an already-existing st
> window, as you would with GNU screen or tmux.
This works! Thank you very much.
I was following the instructions in the man page, which say to do `scroll st`.
> Nope, the manpage includes this (and looking at git history, has
> since its inception):
>
> EXAMPLES
> st -e scroll /bin/sh
>
> You must have misread it.
You're right, it does say that. But I didn't so much misread it as read the top
of it, were it has:
SYNOPSIS
scroll [-Mh] [-m
> All over the place (tutorials, manuals, articles, questions and answers) I
> see the advice to use the null feature of find (-print0) and xargs (-0) to be
> able to handle any kind of wacky file name (e.g. filenames with newlines).
> Granted, *if* you are going to pipe find into xargs, the ad
> Even when you use multiple arguments per command as with
> -exec '{}' +
> ? It is still spawning a new process for every file match?
No, then it will use the maximum number of file arguments allowed by your shell
for each process.
I think there may be anchovies on that pizza. This is known to cause problems
with several terminal emulators.
> The dependancy on tree-sitter is specficially what made me uninstall neovim
> and switch over to vanilla vim.
You can use the same syntax files you use with Vim on Neovim; you don't have to
use tree-sitter. There is no dependancy.
Since the administrators of this list are unable or unwilling to block access
to this loser, I'm unsubscribing. I don't need this kind of garbage in my
inbox. I have plenty of other kinds of garbage already.
Lee
11 matches
Mail list logo
