Mc Digest, Vol 64, Issue 3

[Jesús Guerrero]

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