• 0 Posts
  • 58 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 27th, 2024

help-circle


  • Yeah, complexity is a valid concern. But if your workflow stands to benefit from the performance gains, I’d say it’s a worthy trade-off.

    The server/client model that Foot uses is actually pretty clever for RAM-constrained situations, especially if you’re spawning tons of terminal instances. AFAIK, it’s not fundamentally impossible with GPU terminals. Ghostty has single-instance mode on Linux that shares some resources, but the RAM savings aren’t as dramatic because GPU terminals maintain texture buffers and rendering state in VRAM per instance.

    The catch with Foot’s approach is all I/O gets multiplexed on a single thread. That’s fine for lightweight usage, but for workflows like mine that involve heavy TUIs and multiple tmux sessions with dozens of windows/panes with big scrollback buffers, it becomes a bottleneck when one or more panes are flooding output from scripts/playbooks/etc.


  • Like daq mentioned, reduced battery life is one downside if you’re on a laptop. RAM usage is also higher, usually 50-100MB more per instance than traditional terminals (sometimes more depending on the terminal and your config).

    In terms of Ghostty specifically, it’s still a fairly young project, so the chance of hitting an edge case issue is higher than if you were using a more mature GPU-accelerated terminal.


  • Bias warning: I spend most of my workdays in the terminal, and I’m also a contributor to Ghostty.

    The most noticeable difference is smoothness when you’re doing intensive terminal work like scrolling through large log files, running TUIs like btop/lazygit/yazi/lnav, or using multiplexers like tmux with multiple panes. Without GPU acceleration, you’ll see stuttering and lag with heavy output or complex interfaces.

    It also makes a big difference in editors like Neovim, especially with syntax highlighting in large files or when scrolling quickly through code. The rendering just feels snappier and more responsive overall.

    Basically, if you spend significant time in the terminal (like I do), the improved responsiveness is immediately noticeable. If you mostly use it for basic shell commands, the benefit is negligible.









  • Pretty sure you could run Pulp in pull-through mode and add your local Forgejo/whatever registry as a remote, which would at least give you a unified “pull” URL. Then just use Forgejo actions to handle the actual build/publish for your local images whenever you push to main (or tag a release, or whatever).

    Pulp might actually be able to handle both on its own, I haven’t ever tried though.


  • Yep, out of all the “gaming-friendly” distros I’ve tried (Bazzite, Nobara, Garuda, Pop!_OS, Mint, etc) Cachy has had the best performance and stability by far, and the least amount of weird quirks or bugs. Genuinely, one of the best distro experiences I’ve had in a long time.

    I do work with linux in a professional capacity every day and have been using Arch on and off for over 15 years, though. My perspective is likely a bit different than the average gamer. That said, I don’t find myself having to dig into things very much/often with Cachy, unless of course I want to. :p