on 08:15 Fri 04 Mar, Les Mikesell (lesmikesell at gmail.com) wrote: > On 3/4/11 12:15 AM, Dr. Ed Morbius wrote: > >> But why do you need screen, then? > > > > Terminal multiplexing, session persistance, scrollback/logging, split > > screen (top running in the top panel, shell underneath, etc.), workflow > > organization (similar processes are grouped in a screen session). > > But all of that just happens by itself in a GUI screen and isn't > limited to text mode. I think you're fundamentally failing to understand my operating mode. Local system == Linux === my administrative center. Remote hosts. May be a dozen. May be 20,000. Or some number between or beyond. Desktop persistance is local. If I have to interactively operate on an individual remote host, I'm doing my job wrong. Preferably that's limited to initial provisioning and possibly hardware troubleshooting. Ideally, not even then (I haven't met my ideal). I'm really not particularly interested in having some complex GUI state on multiple remote systems. Again: my objective isn't to change your mind but possibly open it a tad. That appears to be increasingly unlikely. > > I'm writing this mail in mutt, in a screen session with multiple > > mailboxes open, each to its own screen window. It's like a multi-tabbed > > GNOME or KDE terminal, except that the session persists even if the > > controlling terminal is killed, or X dies altogether. > > Yes, but you are limited to text mode apps. Feature. Running remote GUI management apps is an utter fail. If you've *GOT* to run some remote GUI application, then yes, you're going to want a tool that supports it, of which there are several, and of which NX is merely one of many options. It's not a best, standard, open, free, or actively developed (in free software) solution. I'm done here. -- Dr. Ed Morbius, Chief Scientist / | Robot Wrangler / Staff Psychologist | When you seek unlimited power Krell Power Systems Unlimited | Go to Krell!