SOLVED What is a difference between XTerm, UXTerm and LXTerminal?

[teedee]

Question as stated in topic.

Searching in Google won't give any answer.

[BALLOON a.k.a. Fu-sen.]

The difference as follows:

• XTerm: terminal emulator for the X Window System (since 1996)
• UXTerm: Xterm corresponding to Unicode
• LXTerminal: terminal emulator for the LXDE (since 2008)

LXTerminal is many functions. (example: menubar)
I use LXTerminal willingly.

"LXTerminal" is application included in the LXDE version,
"MATE terminal" is included in MATE version instead,
and "urxvt" is included in Microwatt instead.

[blaze]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xterm

http://invisible-island.net/xterm/

http://invisible-island.net/xterm/manpage/uxterm.html

http://wiki.lxde.org/en/LXTerminal

[teedee]

Thank you for your replies guys but they don't add anything over what I can google and did google before.
According to one topic I've read before, UXTerm does not add Unicode to XTerm because XTerm can process Unicode strings itself. I don't know if it's true or not.. just for your consideration.

Maybe I should ask another question.

Why are XTerm, UXTerm and LXTerminal all included in this distribution if difference between them is so insignificant? Why not include best of them? There is only one text editor, only one calculator, only one graphics editor, only one file manager.. included in distribution.  What is the reason to include 3 terminal emulators?!

[cheiron]

LXTerminal is a lightweight terminal emulator based on GTK+ for the LXDE desktop
[/size]
[/size]This program follows the usual GNU command line syntax, with long options starting with two dashes (`-').
[/size]
[/size]UXTerm is an X terminal emulator for Unicode (UTF-8) environments
[/size]
[/size]Invoke a terminal window with a reasonably optimized range of Unicode support, enforcing UTF-8 mode and using the best Unicode fonts found.
[/size]
[/size]XTerm is a terminal emulator for X
[/size]
[/size]The xterm  program is a terminal emulator for the X Window System.  It provides DEC VT102/VT220 (VTxxx) and Tektronix 4014 compatible terminals for  programs that cannot use the window system directly.
[/size]Thats the difference between them and as to why all 3 are included... i think their definitions answer that one!

[teedee]

I beg your pardon cheiron.. using BIG text won't make your words more convincing

It still does not explain why all 3 are included in distribution and still there is only one file manager instead of 3 included?

Following minimalist thinking you should have one terminal included in distribution and (if you wanted) you could install another one as you do with another file manager or text editor of your choice.

[cheiron]

Apologies for the big text.. been on the go since 04:30am this morning and its now 23:45 and finally done for the day! Slightly tired lol and back up for work in 6 hours time!


I cant answer for Biff obviously as to why all 3 have been included.. Only he can do that as he makes the OS.


Personally i do like having the choice of the 3 terminals so i can use each one for its set use .. but thats just me

[teedee]

Thank you cheiron 

As opposed to you, having 3 terminals makes me confused because I am not Linux professional, just common user. That's why I started this topic. I didn't know what to use when I want to install new application which fails to install using GDebi.

So which one should I use in such case? Any?

[cheiron]

Hopefully Biff will pick this thread up in the next day or so... and answer this one.


What i have done for the moment is create a poll in WattOS Talk for all users to vote on choice of terminal for future usage to help us gauge who wants what.


On a side note though... i use LXTerminal more than the others!


I'm crashing to bed now whilst there are still a handful of hours 

[teedee]

Thanks cheiron  Get some rest!

[biffster]

Hi all.

I will help clear this up for you.

1. LXterminal comes with LXDE as part of the desktop environment so its included in the install and its a servicable terminal and functions well within LXDE. (and has been included for years)
2. xterm is required as the installer uses it and its coded to do as such. (and I have not changed that code) I considered removing and changing the code before releasing R8, but it was left as is as it added negligible space and overhead and the effort and time made it an easy decision.
3. uxterm is not a separate package (even though it has its own binay). Its a wrapper around xterm to provide locale and UTF-8. If you go look at the package in synaptic (xterm) you will see it says as much in the description, and when xterm is installed, uxterm is as well.

The cleanup that probably would be easiest is to simply remove the menu entries for both xterm and uxterm and remove said confusion. I will look into that for R9 and I am not sure about changing the code specific to the terminal as its a utility.

As far as what terminal works best for your environment? Thats a debate that could go on forever. The average desktop user does not do much in the terminal except use it when a GUI does not meet their needs for what they are trying to accomplish. (So this is not a debate place for terminals -  roxterm,xterm,uxterm,urxvt,terminator,tilda, etc) You are using the bash shell regardless of terminal choice - So unless you are programming or have other specific needs the average user uses whats included as the default. (lxterminal, gnome, etc).

So unless you have a specific application or question regarding terminal performance I suggest removing xterm from synaptic or removing the menu entries if they are causing confusion and just use lxterminal for LXDE. If you are interested in a more feature rich terminal that does things like split windows, etc. take a look at terminator.

Couple other quick notes. Please specify 32 or 64bit in your questions, and please remove the URL from your signature block as its not linux related, does not appear to be a personal web site but business related (maybe your business?), and not related to technology. So we generally ask people to not put URL's in their signatures that are not personal, or related to technology/linux in some way as it could be misinterpreted as spam, and people have been blocked for that.

If you want to send me a direct message with a explanation, I will be happy to discuss further the URL and web site.

Regards,
biff

[leenie]

The reason I like to use LXTerminal is that it can accept copy/paste.

[teedee]

Thank you biffbaxter for your explanation. It is enough for me.
Of course I'll remove link from my signature. I've read forum rules and guides and didn't find anything against it but if you say it is not ok, I'll comply

[blaze]

^^So can the others, you paste with middle click.