Ive noticed its has been any activity in their github for a longtime. https://github.com/dylanaraps/neofetch
There are a few more info that could be added nowadays like Display Protocol (Wayland/X11) and Display size. FastFetch does this but Neofetch is globally recognized.
Fastfetch vs Neofetch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
No, screen is a terminal multiplexer, like tmux. The terminal emulator I use is alacritty.
Terminal multiplexers are terminal emulators.
They don't run by themselves, they need a terminal emulator, or a console, underneath, so they can work. You can actually call screen on a console without graphical environment, and it'll provide the console all benefits of multiplexing. That doesn't make the multiplexer a terminal emulator by itself.
So, in my mind no, screen is not a terminal emulator, alacritty is, like xterm is, and so on. The multiplexor just adds extra capabilities to the terminal emulator.
At any rate, it's not worth going any further. What I meant is that neofetch was able to find out and show I'm using alacritty, whereas fastfetch doesn't show alacritty. And we can argue about the virtue of one or the other, but it'll boil down to taste. I prefer how neofetch shows alacritty, hehe. Some might prefer fastfetch showing screen. And most importantly, this is not critical at all.
There's an issue on fastfetch filed about it, and one of the devs indicated when using the screen multiplexer, they could find out the terminal emulator underneath, however they couldn't do the same with tmux. And to be consistent among multiplexers, they decided not to expose the terminal emulator underneath when using multiplexers, just show the multiplexer. I don't agree with that argument, but it's the dev right to choose to do that.
Greetings !