Take the 2-minute tour ×
Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm using cssh (aka clusterssh) to manage an experimental, peer-to-peer system, and I've observed a curious behaviour: the terminals seem to kill the last character that should appear on each line, i.e. I get

Iproto)=7d59d8fa (Isrc)=00001011 (Idst)=0bcf (Tsrc)@>> in <RouterVisitor:['b
cpe+f', "scanning rings @0.442442758736: [(True, -0.641888605544--0.55755724
264, 'L')]", '<Node--102--0.624, <NameID::4xjg2> :: EQ:-& (Idst > 00001388 (
dst)) & (Isrc < 558b5f84 (Isrc)) & (Idst > 0000196f (Idst)) & (Idst < 00001c

while I should instead have

Iproto)=7d59d8fa (Isrc)=00001011 (Idst)=0bcf (Tsrc)@>> in <RouterVisitor:['by
cpe+f', "scanning rings @0.442442758736: [(True, -0.641888605544--0.55755724?
264, 'L')]", '<Node--102--0.624, <NameID::4xjg2> :: EQ:-& (Idst > 00001388 (I
dst)) & (Isrc < 558b5f84 (Isrc)) & (Idst > 0000196f (Idst)) & (Idst < 00001c?

(? are for characters which I know should be there to match e.g. float precision, but which I don't precisely know)

Is that something that is known from XTerm (I usually use other terminals)? Is there any configuration file I should check?


I note, by the way, that windows created by clusterssh for the terminals can be resized at pixel-level precision, rather than at character-level precision as a regular xterm window would on this system (Ubuntu+e16 window manager).

share|improve this question
    
I would guess that $COLUMNS is 76 but the window width is at least one pixel too narrow for the 76th character. Perhaps cssh has an out-by-one bug that prevents it from reporting a reduced width correctly whilst preventing it from rendering the last column which is one-pixel too narrow. –  RedGrittyBrick Sep 6 '12 at 14:06
    
as far as tests go, it looks like I'm actually killing that last column myself, when stretching the window vertically for better readability. The fact that it's resizing pixel-per-pixel implies that there's less resistance towards the deletion of a column... –  sylvainulg Sep 6 '12 at 15:03

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.