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.