Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!umd5!jonnyg
From: jonnyg@umd5.umd.edu (Jon Greenblatt)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Starting remote xterms
Message-ID: <4293@umd5.umd.edu>
Date: 1 Dec 88 01:16:10 GMT
References: <5345@polya.Stanford.EDU> <4292@umd5.umd.edu>
Reply-To: jonnyg@umd5.umd.edu (Jon Greenblatt)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 23

In article <4292@umd5.umd.edu> jonnyg@umd5.umd.edu (Jon Greenblatt) writes:
>In article <5345@polya.Stanford.EDU> weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Joe Weening) writes:
>>I have been using a command of the form
>>
>>    "rsh remotehost -n 'exec /usr/bin/X11/xterm >& /dev/null' &"
>
>	This is a very inefficient way of doing things. The X Window buffers
>ar far more numerous than the equivalent rsh buffers as far as I know.
>Try the following:
>
>	"xterm -e rlogin remotehost"

	Well I put my money where my mouth used to be and found that I am
mostly wrong. If the window is being used as a standard terminal with
character input and output, xterm is more efficient than rlogin. If
however you are doing a lot of cut and past or the window is being affected
by numerous external events then rlogin is more efficient. If speed is
at all important to you xterm is 5-10 times faster. I now remove the foot
from my mouth. I established this using a netwatch program. I still
prefer rlogin becuse I have always had problems with lingering processes and
what not using xterm remotely. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.

				JonnyG.