GNU bug report logs - #78474
31.0.50; Wrong char insertion in rxvt

Previous Next

Full log

Message #437 received at 78474 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault <at> gnu.org>
Cc: bzg <at> gnu.org, Sebastien.Hinderer <at> inria.fr, rpluim <at> gmail.com,
 manuel <at> ledu-giraud.fr, 78474 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#78474: 31.0.50; Wrong char insertion in rxvt
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 10:38:17 +0300

> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 09:14:46 +0200
> From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault <at> gnu.org>
> Cc: manuel <at> ledu-giraud.fr, rpluim <at> gmail.com, bzg <at> gnu.org,
> 	Sebastien.Hinderer <at> inria.fr, 78474 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii, le jeu. 24 juil. 2025 09:40:43 +0300, a ecrit:
> > > From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault <at> gnu.org>
> > > The choice of terminal hardly changes anything at all. It's emacs that
> > > consumes one core 100%, while the terminal consumes 1-3% only.
> > 
> > I'd encourage others to run similar benchmarks on these and other
> > terminals.  Gnome-terminal, alacritty, kitty, screen, tmux, and the
> > Linux console come to mind.  Also, if someone can test this in a
> > remote-login session, especially over a slow connection, those numbers
> > would be important to have.
> 
> Really, I strongly doubt there will be any kind of difference, since
> it's emacs that goes 100% cpu and the terminal does essentially nothing.
> 
> I tried via ssh, screen and tmux to check, it's just all the
> same: emacs eating 100% and ssh not even eating 1%.

That's expected with fast connections, yes.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.