Re:Love, hate, and tmux
by technomancy on Friday December 10, 2010 @08:08PM
(#1993822)
> This is an important distinction, though, to me, it doesn't make one better or worse than the other
setuid I could handle if it were just that, but screen reimplements its own internal permissions model, while tmux simply uses unix permissions, which everyone already understands. Composability wins.
screen reimplements its own internal permissions model
That's exactly my point. This is neither categorically good nor bad. It doesn't reinvent permissions gratuitously, but, rather, as a way of increasing flexibility.
It allows per-window permissions and fairly arbitrary permissionsetting, for any user, without resorting to groups (the membership of which a regular user does not control) or universal permissions.
I disagree, since we're talking about open source, here. More to the point, this is a marketing reason[1], not a technical one.
screen actually requires suid for multiuser support, which is atrocious, while tmux simply communicates over a socket, and whoever has the permissions for the socket can join the session.
This is an important distinction, though, to me, it doesn't make one better or worse than the other, in general, just for specific circumstances. This kind of detail is why I crave objective comparisons, like the OC, though perhaps from different motivation.
[1] Which I, personally, don't consider valid, though I wouldn't suggest it isn't to you.