Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-16 Thread Bill McGonigle
Nice meaty discussion on this topic! As Paul mentioned, cellular data can be considered high-latency for most purposes, so this one probably isn't going out of style any time soon. On Sep 14, 2007, at 16:13, Ben Scott wrote: PuTTY does appear to support this, more-or-less, by going to

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-16 Thread Ben Scott
On 9/16/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody stop me before I try running PuTTY under WINE on Linux. :) PuTTY has been ported to *nix/X11. :) http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/faq.html#faq-unix I guess a good ancillary question is where's the development

High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Bill McGonigle
On Sep 14, 2007, at 14:17, Paul Lussier wrote: You mean like ssh, screen, and emacs ;) I've attempted this on a satellite link and, believe me, it's only suited to medium-latency links. ssh-ing to Mars would suck as well. Has anybody seen a line-mode-oriented shell? I'd love to edit my

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Ben Scott
On 9/14/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've attempted this on a satellite link ... Heh heh heh. Me too(TM). It's a different experience when you can measure ping RTT using a hand-held stop watch. :) Has anybody seen a line-mode-oriented shell? Stephen Bourne. (According

High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Bill Freeman
Bill McGonigle writes: ... Has anybody seen a line-mode-oriented shell? I'd love to edit my line locally and then send it in these situations rather than waiting for characters to echo back. What you really want is a line mode terminal program. One that lets you edit locally, then,

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Don Leslie
I have not used FreeNX but I did use their commercial product NX. It made a huge improvement. Don ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Ben Scott
On 9/14/07, Bill Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tougher thing is if you want to send an incomplete line sometime. Say, to request the remote shell to do filename completeion. I suspect file name completion might be one of those advanced features one has to give up when you go back to

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Mark E. Mallett
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 04:13:27PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote: At that point, the hard part is finding a *terminal* that supports a local line editing mode. I think there might be an xterm or rxvt option somewhere for this. Maybe on one of the [CTRL]+click menus? (I'm not at an xterm right

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread Michael ODonnell
I suspect file name completion might be one of those advanced features one has to give up when you go back to the bad-old-days of high-latency links and local editing. Yeesh! D'ya think? ;- Much of coolness offered by bash (completions, editing modes, etc) is a direct result of bash's

Re: High Latency Survival Tactics (Was: Re: Thunderbird stupid about X traffic?)

2007-09-14 Thread VirginSnow
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 17:19:19 -0400 From: Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 9/14/07, Bill Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The tougher thing is if you want to send an incomplete line sometime. Say, to request the remote shell to do filename completeion. I suspect file name completion