On Mon, August 10, 2009 19:02, A. Zimmer wrote: > > In the case of rxvt, it is a little behind the times. The new trend is > Unicode > which rxvt doesn't provide. But compared to the newer rxvt-unicode and > even xterm, rxvt is still a lot smaller in size and that's why I prefer to > use it, especially when I sometimes have over ten X terminals open > simultaneously.
Did you try the urxvtd/urxvtc combo compiled without libafterimage support and with a bitmap font? Of course, unicode comes at a price considering that the characters are multibyte. I haven't done any comparisson about ram usage lately but it might worth it. -- Jesús Guerrero _______________________________________________ Mc mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc
