On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 10:02:07AM -0500, Kendrick Vargas wrote: > On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, martin sepulveda wrote: > > > i hate to say the obvious, but fvwm is not great, it's the best wm around. > > > > if there were plenty of config files i doubt anyone would be using any > > other (bloated) wms. > > Actually, I think it'd be more like "if there were a graphical > configuration client available i doubt anyone would be using any other > (bloated) wms." At this point, I think that's all that's really keeping > FVWM from the (now) popular gnome/kde crowd. > -peace
Even if the default-configuration would be a little more beautifull, that would help a lot! BTW: I use fvwm2.5.6 together with gnome2.2, that makes gnome useable :-) (after disableing the icons on the desktop) Klaus > > -- > Let he who is without clue kiss my ass > > -- > Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>. > To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a > message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 5) People say Linux is ugly. How does that make you feel? Torvalds: They'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes. Let's see just how ugly they think it is when they have a few bulletholes in them. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
