
GNU Screen v.4.4.0 - lelf
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/screen-users/2016-06/msg00014.html
======
SwellJoe
I've tried to switch to tmux a few times over the years, but the command line
options and keybindings never stick in my brain. My fingers keep wanting to
use the screen options. So, I always go back. I probably should just figure
out how to make screen do what I want (scrolling back in history is probably
the biggest one, and I know I had figured it out in the past...but my current
systems don't have it working, I don't think, or I don't remember the
incantation to do it). I wish screen worked more like a normal terminal
session, is what I'm trying to say, and tmux seems to be closer to that ideal
without configuration or learning new ways to do things. But, my muscle memory
wants screen.

~~~
chris_st
I was in the same position a while back. However, thanks to this article[1]
and learning a little bit about tmux behavior, I'm happily tmuxified. I
recommend it.

[1]: [https://mutelight.org/practical-tmux](https://mutelight.org/practical-
tmux)

~~~
wyldfire
> Screen contents persisted through full-screen programs: in Screen, you lose
> your terminal's previous contents after leaving a full-screen program like
> an editor. Tmux doesn't have this problem.

Does this mean I can preserve scrollback among each terminal? If so, I'll
switch tomorrow morning. That's screen's biggest drawback.

~~~
amadeusz
Um, each screen window remembers it's scrollback properly? C-a [ - to enter
'scrollback' mode, and you can use arrows there.

What they seem to describe is altscreen behaviour which can be disabled with
"altscreen off" in .screenrc .

~~~
wyldfire
Oh, that's right. I'm so used to the terminal emulator's scrollback buffer
keys I forgot that you just have to escape to get to this behavior. I suppose
there's no way to have this work the way I want until/unless the terminal mode
natively supported multiple sessions/screens.

------
faster
I use screen on old servers and have tried to craft a tmux config that works
several times, and failed.

Ubuntu repos include a nice package called byobu[1] that is a layer on top of
tmux (or screen) that mostly makes copy/paste work like screen, while keeping
the working scrollback from tmux instead of making it compatible with the
usually-broken (in my experience) screen scrollback.

Byobu works well for me, so I'm using tmux on most of my servers now but it
feels almost like screen.

[1] [http://byobu.co/](http://byobu.co/)

------
roylez
I was reluctant to switch to tmux, but screen's never fixing its UTF8 display
in hardstatus makes me sad.

~~~
daveguy
On the plus side tmux is a BSD style license and not GPL. So it is a more free
(as in libre) software.

Edit: I guess that was obvious considering this gnu screen announcement
contains as much (or more) discussion about tmux as screen.

~~~
goodplay
Unless your usage includes redistribution, GPL/BSD licensing differences have
little effect on end-users.

Also, the definition of one license is "more free" than the other is
completely subjective and is wholly dependent on the perspective of the
licensee.

~~~
daveguy
> Also, the definition of one license is "more free" than the other is
> completely subjective and is wholly dependent on the perspective of the
> licensee.

That is just false. BSD has fewer restrictions. GPL has more restrictions. No
subjective interpretation needed.

~~~
liw
The BSD license allows the software to be made non-free. The GPL doesn't. To
me, this means the GPL wins on freedom.

Not everyone agrees. Hence, subjective interpretation. Saying otherwise is
just trolling.

~~~
nercht12
>> "The BSD license allows the software to be made non-free."

Let's clarify: Technically, it allows the copy (distributed with the
proprietary software) to become non-free, though the original and any other
copies of the original are still free. Technically, BSD is more "free" than
GPL to the _first_ copier, even if not so to everyone else who obtains it from
the first copier. The "subjective interpretation" then is from the point of
view of the next guy in line.

------
clishem
One advantage of screen over tmux I found is that it has much better mouse
support.

~~~
aroch
I think mouse support in Tmux is significantly better; it is hidden behind
config flags but tmux supports window and screen switching, buffer scrolling
(mouse wheel support), copy-on-select, plus you can bind mouse keys as part of
functions.

~~~
Sanddancer
Version 2.1 of tmux combined all those config flags to a simple :mouse=on, so
you don't have to go through one by one to enable all the mouse features.

------
steveklabnik
For some context, the last few releases of screen were:

    
    
      * 4.3.0: June 2015
      * 4.2.1: April 2014
    

I've heard many people say that they use tmux because screen never gets
updated.

~~~
nnutter
I can't tell whether you are trying to claim that it never gets updated or
show that that isn't true.

~~~
steveklabnik
A little of A, a little of B. A new release is a bit newsworthy, since they
don't happen super often. But at the same time, "never gets updated" is
clearly not true.

~~~
schwarze_pest
Of course it was true.

screen-4.0.3 2008-08-07

screen-4.2.0 2014-04-27

------
LinuxBender
The number one request I get from folks around screen is how to have more than
40 screens in a single screen session. It is a hard coded limit. (MAXWIN 40)
Many people recompile it to have more, but I don't want to maintain yet
another internal build of a package.

Screen is still awesome and I have taught many folks to use it.

~~~
amadeusz
Current default is 100. You can also use maxwin command (for example 'maxwin
200', up to 2048) in your screenrc file to define other value, no need to
recompile. However do note that you can't change it in already started screen.

~~~
LinuxBender
This limit must be due to the older versions we have in CentOS 6.
screen-4.0.3-19.el6.x86_64

------
caf
It seems like a poor choice not to have the new version include compatibility
code allowing it to attach to sessions created under the previous version.

This isn't the first time this has happened, either - last time a small patch
was bandied around (I think I saw it on the Debian bug tracker) that fixed the
problem.

------
wprapido
a happy screen user! it's a true game changer!

~~~
matt-attack
Yep I've been using screen for many many years. It's one of those tools that
entirely changed how I work. Still haven't had sufficient motivation to switch
to tmux, since screen just works and I know all of its key bindings very well.

FWIW, I've found that CTLR-j is the best choice for the primary escape
sequence. As an emacs user CTRL-a was unacceptable as was pretty much
CTRL-<everything else>.

~~~
xenophonf
I use backquote (i.e., I have "escape ``" in my screenrc). For some reason
this appeals to me more than a control sequence, which I blame on Emacs. For a
long time I used Emacs under screen almost exclusively, and I was desperate
for a screen command sequence that didn't conflict with Emacs---which ruled
out almost all the control key combos. Reaching for the top corner of the
keyboard to begin an escape sequence feels pretty natural to me because of my
history with Emacs on terminals that don't support the Meta modifier, and
backquote doesn't conflict with key bindings for the editing modes I typically
use in Emacs. Backquote is used infrequently enough in other contexts for it
to interrupt my typing, with the exception command interpolation. (I wish I
could say I came up with it on my own, but it was actually a friend of mine
who clued me in.)

~~~
rabidrat
I love backquote for the escape char. It's better than ctrl-anything because
it's one less keypress and the location is one of the easiest to hit blindly
from a UX perspective (even ESC is more of a reach).

------
cm3
If you want something more modular, you might want to look at dvtwm and
abduco. I'm not using them, but others do successfully and it's worth
mentioning in this thread.

------
qwertyuiop924
I never really used screen, because all I really want is dtach.

