Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 10:34:28PM -0700, David E. Fox wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:52:00 -0700 Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: XFCE calls it the Mini Command Line. KDE calls it something else which I am most likely misremembering as Launch Bar. It is not the panel at the Alt-F2, or run command. Actually, I am not certain that it has another term. Nope, that's not it. That's something else. This is a text entry box embedded in the panel. In the old days, one would put the X preferences of applications inside a custom .xinitrc file, so that every time you typed rxvt the session would apply the preferred options. Doing that, or using a shell wrapper or alias would alleviate that issue. True, which is effectively what the icons are. They just don't need to start a terminal to access the alias or wrapper first. ;) A long time ago, I learned to rely on a neat feature of bash: ctrl-R, backwards interactive search. I just got used to hitting ctrl-R and typing the first letter or two of the command I wanted. zsh has something similar. First 2-3 letteres then Esc-P to go through all matching commands. :D -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Jun 15 2005, David E. Fox wrote: Still, the load time doesn't bother me all that much, even though Im running a relatively underpowered machine by today's standards (Athlon 1000 mhz). I do have quite a bit of RAM here (768 megs), though. Underpowered machine? If that is underpowered, then, please, I accept donations of underpowered hardware from any poster of this list. :-) Which parts of libraries will likely be evicted from RAM when it becomes necessary -- or even if not. Only the really needed parts of libraries are really brought in. Some KDE apps do bring in more libraries than traditional (non-KDE) tools, for instance: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ldd `which konsole` | wc -l 40 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ldd `which xterm` | wc -l 19 Looking towards minimizing the amount of memory used by my system, I have now decided to use rxvt-unicode in daemon mode (together with fluxbox and the Minimal style). This way, according to top, I save a non-negligible amount of memory gained regarding what I used to have when I was using many instances of rxvt (the vanilla version). BTW, here is what my system shows: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ldd `which urxvt` | wc -l 12 I have not been a user of vanilla xterm for ages, since I am usually very tight on RAM and find it with way too many bells and whistles to do just what I wanted. But, as another poster pointed out, there are shared similarities among various components of a desktop environment, and because of shared memory, one might only haev a single copy of a library shared among those components at any one time. That is true, indeed, but I have not quantified it yet. But the zillion daemons running and polluting my home directory with unwanted dot-files (or, worse, unwanted files under dot-directories) is a thing that turns me down. :-( For instance, the fact that opening up some GTK 2.0-based applications starts gconfd-2 is really annoying, IMO. But with KDE it seems that the daemon-proliferation is much worse (at least the last time I checked). As it may be obvious from my e-mail, I am an old-school Unix user. I have tried to switch to the new modus operandi of treating my computer as a tool and ignoring what is driving it (so that I could be more productive---or, at least, I thought so), but I couldn't stand the limitations that I felt. :-( Just my 2 cents, Rogrio. -- Rogrio Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Anthony Campbell: On 14 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: I think it was already there when I started using IceWM (~4 years ago)! Unfortunately, it lacks Tab-completion and history. What I like is that when you finish the command with Ctrl-Enter the command is started inside a terminal. Very handy for things like 'top'. This has me a bit confused. What is this Win-Space? So you mean the double-height Taskbar? Yes and no. With Win-Space I meant my keyboard shortcut: Windows key + Space bar. You could also do Ctrl-Alt-Space. If you use the double-height taskbar, then the command line gets input focus. Otherwise, the command line is displayed instead of the task list until you hit Enter. I prefer the latter since I have only 1024x768 on a 14 display. I try to minimize waste of display space as much as I can. J. -- When standing at the top of beachy head I find the rocks below very attractive. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 15 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: Anthony Campbell: On 14 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: I think it was already there when I started using IceWM (~4 years ago)! Unfortunately, it lacks Tab-completion and history. What I like is that when you finish the command with Ctrl-Enter the command is started inside a terminal. Very handy for things like 'top'. This has me a bit confused. What is this Win-Space? So you mean the double-height Taskbar? Yes and no. With Win-Space I meant my keyboard shortcut: Windows key + Space bar. You could also do Ctrl-Alt-Space. If you use the double-height taskbar, then the command line gets input focus. Otherwise, the command line is displayed instead of the task list until you hit Enter. I prefer the latter since I have only 1024x768 on a 14 display. I try to minimize waste of display space as much as I can. J. Thanks for this clarification. My Windows keys don't seem to do this (probably because I re-assigned them to other things and don't know what they used to be) but Ctrl-Alt-Space does work. Very useful - don't know how I missed this one. AC -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Microsoft-free zone|| books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Anthony Campbell: On 15 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: Yes and no. With Win-Space I meant my keyboard shortcut: Windows key + Space bar. You could also do Ctrl-Alt-Space. Thanks for this clarification. My Windows keys don't seem to do this ModSuperIsCtrlAlT=1 # 0/1 J. -- I am getting worse rather than better. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 15 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: Anthony Campbell: On 15 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: Yes and no. With Win-Space I meant my keyboard shortcut: Windows key + Space bar. You could also do Ctrl-Alt-Space. Thanks for this clarification. My Windows keys don't seem to do this ModSuperIsCtrlAlT=1 # 0/1 J. -- I am getting worse rather than better. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html I have that but it doesn't make a difference. Pressing those keys brings up a Workspace list. AC. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Microsoft-free zone|| books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. They do indeed - because they are desktop environments, not WMs. E.g. in GNOME's case, you've got a file manager, panel (launching tool), various panel applets (clocks, etc.) as well as the WM. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:54:46 +0100 (BST) Thomas Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Lee Braiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's debatable, actually. It could be argued that, since desktop environments *do* share libraries etc, they reduce redundancy and therefore memory and load times. One could even argue that, since the code in Heh. When was the last time you tried to load KDE or GNOME? They take an absolute age, pulling in I don't know what -- and whats more, the About 104 days ago, when I booted the machine. (Actually that's not quite correct -- I restarted the X (thus KDE) session shortly after upgrading to Sarge a few days ago). Still, the load time doesn't bother me all that much, even though Im running a relatively underpowered machine by today's standards (Athlon 1000 mhz). I do have quite a bit of RAM here (768 megs), though. case of KDE that loads a lot of libs for applications, whether you use them or not. Which parts of libraries will likely be evicted from RAM when it becomes necessary -- or even if not. Only the really needed parts of libraries are really brought in. Some KDE apps do bring in more libraries than traditional (non-KDE) tools, for instance: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ldd `which konsole` | wc -l 40 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ldd `which xterm` | wc -l 19 But, as another poster pointed out, there are shared similarities among various components of a desktop environment, and because of shared memory, one might only haev a single copy of a library shared among those components at any one time. -- David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:52:00 -0700 Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: XFCE calls it the Mini Command Line. KDE calls it something else which I am most likely misremembering as Launch Bar. It is not the panel at the Alt-F2, or run command. Actually, I am not certain that it has another term. You're right, there's no tab completion, which is a nice feature to have, and I don't see why it couldn't be included. After all, the kparts feature (one that really turned me onto KDE in the first place) means that I could actually be running 'bash' while in that command window.. On the other hand, semantically it might not work, simply because TAB has a different contextual meaning while in that window -- to wit, move to the next box on the form.) My terminal: I never learned the command line for the GNOME Terminal and rxvt's command line which I have memorized is too long to type out every time. (rxvt -bg black -fg white -cr green -sl 1500) In the old days, one would put the X preferences of applications inside a custom .xinitrc file, so that every time you typed rxvt the session would apply the preferred options. Doing that, or using a shell wrapper or alias would alleviate that issue. Incidentally, my shell sessions usually have a long history associated with them. Oftentimes, my fingers can't remember all the options I used when I used a command, and I might only use such a command once a week, or even less. A long time ago, I learned to rely on a neat feature of bash: ctrl-R, backwards interactive search. I just got used to hitting ctrl-R and typing the first letter or two of the command I wanted. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Cam [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WindowMaker is the best... it doesn't seem to be under development anymore though... am i wrong? Last CVS snapshot is dated 2005-04-09 -- John L. Fjellstad web: http://www.fjellstad.org/ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:17:09PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: satisfies my requirements well. I wouldn't have put so much time into fixing up the packages for Debian if I didn't think it was useful. That's nice that you spend time on it -- and if it suits you, then all well and good. When I used it, it seemed to crash a lot, and offered not a lot in terms of focus or placement policies in comparsion to other WMs (and some DEs). But I can see why people like it. See I wouldn't use it if it crashed a lot. I don't understand that. There are undoubtedly bugs in it as with every software but the ones I've seen have all been minor. -- ,--huggie-at-earth-dot-listuff-thing-stuff--DF5CE2B4--. _| If you want to put your cat out, use a high quality fire |_ | extinguisher. - ISIHAC| `- http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ - http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ -' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Simon Huggins wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 07:09:00PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) In that sense, then perhaps. But XFCE4's only good thing is that it has plenty of eye-candy. You can't do a thing with it other than that. I understand that a window manager/desktop environment is a personal choice but saying you can't do a thing with it is just wrong; it satisfies my requirements well. I wouldn't have put so much time into fixing up the packages for Debian if I didn't think it was useful. Personally, I think XFCE4 is great (apart from a few minor things I haven't been able to configure). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Jochen Schulz wrote: A window manager is a program that just manages windows. It gives applications an area on the screen where they can be displayed and most often the WM draws a border around it, gives it a nice title and enables the user to do things with these windows - put one on the foreground, minimize another one etc. Very often window managers come with some kind of a panel, virtual desktop support and some kind of application launcher (a start menu or icons on the panel), but strictly speaking, this is exceeding the task of a minimal WM. Desktop environments (KDE, Gnome. Xfce) do far more than that. They come with a file manager, draw the background with pixmaps and icons, they do some work behind your back to easily handle removable storage or enable drag'n drop. They come with control centers to do system administration and generally give the user a simplified, cleaned up view on their system. Applications supporting the DE all look the same and share a lot of routines to do common tasks. DEs also provide applications with a way to register themselves for a filetype which they can handle, which is then reflected when using the DE's file manager and so on... Of course, this list is not complete. Interesting, thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Ultimately this is one of those personal taste type things.. Whatever works for you is your best option. Maybe try a few and see what works for you - Original Message - From: Adam Funk To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 10:07 AM Subject: Re: Request for window manager recommendations Jochen Schulz wrote: A window manager is a program that just manages windows. It gives applications an area on the screen where they can be displayed and most often the WM draws a border around it, gives it a nice title and enables the user to do things with these windows - put one on the foreground, minimize another one etc. Very often window managers come with some kind of a panel, virtual desktop support and some kind of application launcher (a start menu or icons on the panel), but strictly speaking, this is exceeding the task of a minimal WM. Desktop environments (KDE, Gnome. Xfce) do far more than that. They come with a file manager, draw the background with pixmaps and icons, they do some work behind your back to easily handle removable storage or enable drag'n drop. They come with control centers to do system administration and generally give the user a simplified, cleaned up view on their system. Applications supporting the DE all look the same and share a lot of routines to do common tasks. DEs also provide applications with a way to register themselves for a filetype which they can handle, which is then reflected when using the DE's file manager and so on... Of course, this list is not complete. Interesting, thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 09:42:02PM -0700, David E. Fox wrote: The load time - at least to me - is a rather specious argument. Most people, I would think, would keep the WM up and running as long as the box is (personally, this box has been up for nearly four months, and I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've restarted X/KDE). (I don't have or use a laptop, and I realize that wouldn't really apply to those people on laptops.) Not that it matters much. My work laptop from about 3 years ago ran KDE and I had 2 docks set up for it. One at work, one at home. So it was rebooted twice a day except on weekends. Walk into work, slide it into the dock, turn it on, walk off to get my morning cup of cocoa/soda, by the time I was back it was up. *shrug* I liked that setup so much that when I moved on I kept the home dock (bought it with my own funds) and purchased an identical laptop off of eBay. It has served me well for 3 years though nowadays I run XFCE4 instead of KDE. If I had a beefier laptop that I'd put Debian on[*] I'd run KDE again. I don't really like GNOME. That's just a personal feeling; I just find it a bit more clunky in comparison with KDE. I never liked why GNOME came about. KDE was formed to make a decent desktop for 'nixes. GNOME was formed because people didn't like KDE's choice of QT and wanted to kill it. Odd sidenote, though, I prefer GTK to QT. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 06:25:08AM -0300, Rogério Brito wrote: But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. Both incorporate the functionality of WMs into them. Personoal preference is that a pure WM is too barebones. I never quite understood the logic behind requiring command line tools and text files to configure a graphical environment. Also calling XFCE a desktop environment is pushing it a little. It certainly does not have the integration of KDE or GNOME and there's very little that goes on the desktop. It has a panel/kicker (choose your idiom) and a task switcher. Both of which can be shut off and both of which can be added to a pure WM. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never quite understood the logic behind requiring command line tools and text files to configure a graphical environment. No? See this: http://edulinux.homeunix.org/fvwm/user_enumerate.html Also calling XFCE a desktop environment is pushing it a little. No, it's the exact, and proper definition. -- Thomas Adam ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:35:23PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: A Desktop Environment provides a full framework of integrated applications (such as a file manager, office applications, etc.) that all share the same theme. Often common options applied to one program, will affect the other components, because they're related. Oddly enough when you said share a common theme my first reaction is that's a WM as a WM controls the widgets on the application which is part of the theme. A Window Manager, on the other hand, does just that -- it manages windows. It doesn't dictate a file manager -- if you want one, you can use one. There's no interoperability or common functions shared between programs, like there is with DEs. It certainly provides a great deal more flexibility. So how does XFCE4 fail that test? Let's see, I have 3 file managers to choose from. XFFM, Konqueror, Nautilus. Those were configured automagically. I could add more if I like, just like a WM. BTW, when trying to rid myself of Windows earlier this year I was using Nautilus under KDE as installed by Ubuntu. So in that way, WMs are much faster, and most WMs are damn good at managing the windows mapped to them. Actually I've found WMs lacking at managing windows. I consider starting a window with the desired application part of good management. Configuring that portion for most WMs is a PITA. The other portions they are equal to the DEs like KDE/Gnome and the odd-man-out that is XFCE4. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:56:46PM +0100, Simon Huggins wrote: I need to compile up 4.2.2 packages for sarge and bung them on the alioth page at some point. Mmmm, upgrades. I really should see if there's something later than 4.0.6 out. :D -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:00:18PM -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: Having been a loyal IceWM user since Potato was new I recently switched to Xfce4 to see what it could do for me. Well, IceWM has /never/ crashed on me in all that time. Last week Xfce4 crashed on me five times. Other than that, yes, it's a good compromise*. I've gone back to the tried and true IceWM. I'd be curious as to why XFCE4 is crashing on you. Just recently I ended a 73 day uptime on my laptop. XFCE4 was in use the entire time, not a single crash. Most common applications used were Thunderbird, Firefox, OpenOffice, Azureus and GNOME's Terminal. The only thing that crashed regularly was Azureus at 2.2.0.0 and 2.3.0.0 because of a lack of memory on this machine and JAVA's pigishness. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:09:31PM +0100, Clive Menzies wrote: I reckon ;) Having started with KDE and switched to xfce, it seems an excellent compromise. I tried a few WM's and icewm came close to what I was looking for but it was just a bit too light on frills and whistles. Whereas xfce has some really useful features without the bloat of KDE. I'm betting one of them is the launch bar. Loved it in KDE and when I had to regain some memory only XFCE4 had it. Can't understand how anyone can live without it. :D -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oddly enough when you said share a common theme my first reaction is that's a WM as a WM controls the widgets on the application which is part of the theme. No, I meant it from an aesthetical point of view only. Umm, where did you get the idea that a WM controls the widgets on an application? That's not true. So how does XFCE4 fail that test? Let's see, I have 3 file managers to choose from. XFFM, Konqueror, Nautilus. Those were configured automagically. I could add more if I like, just like a WM. Because XFCE4 has XFFM built into it -- that's the file manager that is used. Yes, you can use another one if you like, but that commonality between applications will then be lost. BTW, when trying to rid myself of Windows earlier this year I was using Nautilus under KDE as installed by Ubuntu. Yes, that's your right to do so. Actually I've found WMs lacking at managing windows. I consider starting a window with the desired application part of good management. Configuring that portion for most WMs is a PITA. The other portions they are Configuring that aspect is usually what makes the whole process fun, IMO. I am curious though which WMs you feel were lacking in that regard. I'd have said the issue isn't so much with the WM, as it might have been with the application, for reasons I won't bore you with. -- Thomas Adam ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 12:58:29PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: No? See this: http://edulinux.homeunix.org/fvwm/user_enumerate.html Doesn't change my opinion. I believe it was either Larry or Guido (one of those P language makers) who once said that what makes a language suited for a particular task is what it makes easy to do and what it makes hard to do. So why should something which I do all the time and can be made simple be purposely made hard. KDE/XFCE: I want to start an application which I've just installed. I know the command name for it. Both have a launch bar. I enter the name, it starts up. Damn. That was easy! So easy in fact that 80% of the time I don't configure a launch button for any particular application. Want to do the same with a pure WM. Step 1: open a CLI. Step 2: enter the command name. Step 3: close the CLI. Step 4: realize I forgot ! at the end of the command. Step 5: reopen CLI. Step 6: type in the command name and !. Step 7: close CLI. What if I want a fancy button. XFCE RMB on the launcher, add new item, launcher, enter the command name, close. Done. Damn. That was easy! Want to do the same with a pure WM. Step 1: open a CLI. Step 2: CD to the right directory. Step 2a: create it if it doesn't exist. Step 3: Fire up the editor on the right text file. Step 3a: create it if it doesn't exist. Step 4: try to find the right location for the menu. Step 5: Enter the configuration information in the proper format. Step 6: Save and exit editor. Step 7: exit CLI. Step 8, this is my faborite... RESTART THE WM SO IT CAN LOAD THE NEW CONFIGURATION! Step 9: Pray for no typos or redo 1-8. Yes, I am fully aware of the power behind text configuration. I however am not about to put on the blinders and say that all configuration should be done through text and that text is appropriate for all configuration. Basic configuration should be provided in a simple manner. WMs don't do that. No, it's the exact, and proper definition. And yet it performs hardly any of the fuctions attributed to DEs like KDE/GNOME or Winders. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:49:27AM -0700, Steve C. Lamb wrote: I liked that setup so much that when I moved on I kept the home dock (bought it with my own funds) and purchased an identical laptop off of eBay. It has served me well for 3 years though nowadays I run XFCE4 instead of KDE. If I had a beefier laptop that I'd put Debian on[*] I'd run KDE again. Meh, put a star there for a later note and forgot to enter it at the bottom. So, here it is... [*] That I would run Debian on meaning I am seriously looking at a powerbook or ibook as my next laptop purchase. Mac experience would help on my resume and with basically FreeBSD as the underlying OS I would be running a 'nix variant with excellen commercial support. I always thought that a OSX mac would be a good non-gaming machine for serious productivity work because of its lineage and appeal to commercial vendors. Of course my lasy job had a requirement on IE6 and MS had only ported IE5 to OSX. Go fig. . -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:08:25PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: No, I meant it from an aesthetical point of view only. Umm, where did you get the idea that a WM controls the widgets on an application? That's not true. The fact that when you shut down the WM without shutting down X the window border along with the close/minimize/maximize buttons (aka, the widgets) disappear? :P Because XFCE4 has XFFM built into it -- that's the file manager that is used. Yes, you can use another one if you like, but that commonality between applications will then be lost. Uh, no, it doesn't. XFFM is a separate application. XFFM can be used with ICEWM if you so chose. Don't believe me? Do an apt-cache show xffm4 and read the suggests line: Suggests: xfwm4, xfce4 Not requires. Not depends. Suggests. Configuring that aspect is usually what makes the whole process fun, IMO. I am curious though which WMs you feel were lacking in that regard. I'd have said the issue isn't so much with the WM, as it might have been with the application, for reasons I won't bore you with. Hrm, which WMs did I use in the past? FVWM2, WM, BB, a few others that were supposed to be the kitty's titties but I uninstalled in about 5m flat because they were completely lacking. IceWM was one that I used for about a year but even so it was too minimalistic for me. KDE was a good standard. GNOME was just wacked. XFCE4 seems to be an excellent compromise. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Want to do the same with a pure WM. Step 1: open a CLI. Step 2: enter the command name. Step 3: close the CLI. Step 4: realize I forgot ! at the end of the command. Step 5: reopen CLI. Step 6: type in the command name and !. Step 7: close CLI. Yup -- and therein lies the difference between the two. Want to do the same with a pure WM. Step 1: open a CLI. Step 2: CD to the right directory. Step 2a: create it if it doesn't exist. Step 3: Fire up the editor on the right text file. Step 3a: create it if it doesn't exist. Step 4: try to find the right location for the menu. Step 5: Enter the configuration information in the proper format. Step 6: Save and exit editor. Step 7: exit CLI. Step 8, this is my faborite... RESTART THE WM SO IT CAN LOAD THE NEW CONFIGURATION! Step 9: Pray for no typos or redo 1-8. Sure -- but at least doing it that way means you yourself have defined how it is to operate, rather than relying on the existing operability of what's available. I have no doubt that right-clicking (or whatever) on XFCE's panel thing to add a new button is intuitive to some -- but so what? What if I didn't like that? What if I wanted to do it some other way? With a WM I would have to define all of these things myself (to a lesser or greater extent, depending on the WM) -- but the advantage is that I took the time to do it myself, so I _know_ how it works, and what to expect. Yes, I am fully aware of the power behind text configuration. I however am not about to put on the blinders and say that all configuration should be done through text and that text is appropriate for all configuration. In certain circumstances I agree. Basic configuration should be provided in a simple manner. WMs don't do that. Simple manner? That's subjective. No, it's the exact, and proper definition. And yet it performs hardly any of the fuctions attributed to DEs like KDE/GNOME or Winders. It still provides inherent look and feel across those applications that XFCE supports. -- Thomas Adam ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The fact that when you shut down the WM without shutting down X the window border along with the close/minimize/maximize buttons (aka, the widgets) disappear? :P Those are window decorations that the WM defined, so of course they'd disappear -- but the widgets of the _application_ will still be there. The window decoration is part of the application. Uh, no, it doesn't. XFFM is a separate application. XFFM can be I meant that in terms of it is still used and recognised by XFCE. Hrm, which WMs did I use in the past? FVWM2, WM, BB, a few others that were supposed to be the kitty's titties but I uninstalled in about 5m flat because they were completely lacking. IceWM was one that I used for Completely lacking _how_? -- Thomas Adam ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On (14/06/05 12:58), Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never quite understood the logic behind requiring command line tools and text files to configure a graphical environment. No? See this: http://edulinux.homeunix.org/fvwm/user_enumerate.html Thanks Thomas Whenever I've looked at pure WM's I've always floundered. When I've got some time I'll revisit fvwm on the strength of your excellent explanation;) Regards Clive -- www.clivemenzies.co.uk ... ...strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On (14/06/05 13:08), Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oddly enough when you said share a common theme my first reaction is that's a WM as a WM controls the widgets on the application which is part of the theme. No, I meant it from an aesthetical point of view only. Umm, where did you get the idea that a WM controls the widgets on an application? That's not true. So how does XFCE4 fail that test? Let's see, I have 3 file managers to choose from. XFFM, Konqueror, Nautilus. Those were configured automagically. I could add more if I like, just like a WM. Because XFCE4 has XFFM built into it -- that's the file manager that is used. Yes, you can use another one if you like, but that commonality between applications will then be lost. I use xfe (file manager) on xfce and it seems fairly integrated but not to the extent of xffm Regards Clive -- www.clivemenzies.co.uk ... ...strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 14 Jun 2005, Steve C. Lamb wrote: [snip] Actually I've found WMs lacking at managing windows. I consider starting a window with the desired application part of good management. Configuring that portion for most WMs is a PITA. The other portions they are equal to the DEs like KDE/Gnome and the odd-man-out that is XFCE4. It's certainly pretty easy in Icewm. You just add a suitable line in the menu file and it then appears in the menu list when you press Ctrl-Esc. Example: prog Mutt xterm xterm -T Mutt -fg ivory -bg gray35 -fn 8x13bold -geom 120x45 -e mutt prog News xterm xterm -T News -fg gray35 -bg bisque -fn 9x15bold -geom 120x45 -e slrn prog Mozilla mozilla mozilla These can be added or deleted on the fly and then activated by refreshing Icewm without stopping it. Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Microsoft-free zone|| books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:38:35PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: Sure -- but at least doing it that way means you yourself have defined how it is to operate, rather than relying on the existing operability of what's available. And you have done any less? Unless you coded the WM you are only using what the WM offers to you. No less, no more. What if I didn't like that? What if I wanted to do it some other way? Such as? You're implying that there's something magical going on without giving specifics upon which to discuss. With a WM I would have to define all of these things myself (to a lesser or greater extent, depending on the WM) -- but the advantage is that I took the time to do it myself, so I _know_ how it works, and what to expect. No. You know how it can be configured. Again, unless you're digging in the code, you don't know how it works. The point I am making is that the two are not mutually exclusive. I like the 80% rule. IE, if something does 80% of what is need well then the other 20% can be hard. That is especially true if the 80% that is easy is what people are going to do 80% of the time anyway. Text configuration of a WM is 20% well, 80% hard. Unacceptable. Simply adding a launch button, which is a common application, should not be hard just for a learning experience. Make it easy. If I need more than the basic application I can RTFM. It is your mentality which is why vi is so rough for people to learn up front even though IMHO a variant of vi(m) is one of the best damn editors out there and I use it religiously. Want to know why? *Because they made the easy things easy to find and learn.* The harder concepts I learn when I need to. Basic configuration should be provided in a simple manner. WMs don't do that. Simple manner? That's subjective. No. It's rather objective I think. Can I do it: A: without 3 other tools. B: opening another application unrelated to the application at hand. C: in a manner which is understandable with minimal documentation in under 5m. D: in a manner which fits about 80% of my needs? That'd be easy because it's at hand, readily consumed and I'd be off doing something else in a short amount of time. No, it's the exact, and proper definition. And yet it performs hardly any of the fuctions attributed to DEs like KDE/GNOME or Winders. It still provides inherent look and feel across those applications that XFCE supports. So you're saying that TK is a DE? Or MOTIF? GTK? QT? How about Windowmaker? I mean you toss in the panel/kicker that it has along with the plugins designed for it they provide a consistant look and feel. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:41:32PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, no, it doesn't. XFFM is a separate application. XFFM can be I meant that in terms of it is still used and recognised by XFCE. But Natilus and Konqueror were recognized so clearly they are integrated with XFCE by your narrow limitation. Hrm, which WMs did I use in the past? FVWM2, WM, BB, a few others that were supposed to be the kitty's titties but I uninstalled in about 5m flat because they were completely lacking. IceWM was one that I used for Completely lacking _how_? Uhm, isn't that what I went into in my other message? Part of managing a window is being able to easily and readily configure opening/closing windows (and the applications in thos windows). Most fail spectacularly on that point. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Such as? You're implying that there's something magical going on without giving specifics upon which to discuss. No, I'm merely stating that with most WMs, the emphasis is on yourself to define how things are to operate -- and that you yourself have the freedom to do so. No. You know how it can be configured. Again, unless you're digging in the code, you don't know how it works. The point I am making is that Code? Oh, no. Just reading docs, examples, other people's configs, etc. for a learning experience. Make it easy. If I need more than the basic application I can RTFM. It is your mentality which is why vi is so rough for people to learn up front even though IMHO a variant of vi(m) is one of the best damn editors out there and I use it religiously. Want to know why? *Because they made the easy things easy to find and learn.* The harder concepts I learn when I need to. That's a little harsh, isn't it? Especially to make assumptions about my mentality. D: in a manner which fits about 80% of my needs? Sure -- but it's still subjective. Which is not a bad thing, but it cannot be applied across the board. If that's what works for you, then that's nice. -- Thomas Adam. ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uhm, isn't that what I went into in my other message? Part of managing a window is being able to easily and readily configure opening/closing windows (and the applications in thos windows). Most fail spectacularly on that point. Ah, so you're referring to it from a configurable point, rather than something which wasn't possible, such as a lacking feature? OK. First off, easily and readily is still subjective. What's easy or readily so to you, might not be to me, or might not be to someone else -- so there's already certain levels of disagreement about that. But that's OK. One thing all WMs and DEs do that I have seen, is they try and provide a set of defaults -- that is they'll usually (through some means) make it known that if you click this button or that button, an action is performed. Whether that action is what you were expecting or not, depends. But like all good WMs, they can be changed -- as to how this happens, depends on the WM, and to an extent, depends upon how far one is prepared to dig to do it. -- Thomas Adam. ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:04:26PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: But like all good WMs, they can be changed -- as to how this happens, depends on the WM, and to an extent, depends upon how far one is prepared to dig to do it. Then name one WM where I can press a button to add a menu item without having to resort to the intervening process of a CLI window, text editor and manual entry/formatting and I might be interested in it. Without that, however, which is all that I have tried thus far, it is lacking. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:48:29PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: It's certainly pretty easy in Icewm. You just add a suitable line in the menu file and it then appears in the menu list when you press Ctrl-Esc. How are the lines added? My previous example, only minorly exagerrated, was based on IceWM. ;) Example: prog Mutt xterm xterm -T Mutt -fg ivory -bg gray35 -fn 8x13bold -geom 120x45 -e mutt prog News xterm xterm -T News -fg gray35 -bg bisque -fn 9x15bold -geom 120x45 -e slrn prog Mozilla mozilla mozilla These can be added or deleted on the fly and then activated by refreshing Icewm without stopping it. By IceWM or through the use of other applications? See, Thomas pointed to a web page where a WM's text file configuration was defended because it was too complex to represent graphically. Yet in the above we have 5 items. 1: type of menu item (program or folder) 2: The name to attribute to that item 3: The icon to associate with the item 4: The application/program to run 5: The command lines to pass on Oddly enough XFCE and KDE can manage a graphic representation of those 5 items. So, uh, where's the problem? Why does it NEED to be in text? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then name one WM where I can press a button to add a menu item without having to resort to the intervening process of a CLI window, text editor and manual entry/formatting and I might be interested in it. Without that, however, which is all that I have tried thus far, it is lacking. Using fvwm-themes, you can. But that relies on you using the FvwmForm along with it. It's not an inherent part of the WM. But I personally don't see how it is lacking if you have to use a text editor to change a menu entry -- I see it as just another means to achieve the same goal. Just because that means might not be how you wanted, that is not lacking; the functionality still exists. -- Thomas Adam ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See, Thomas pointed to a web page where a WM's text file configuration was defended because it was too complex to represent graphically. Yet in the above we have 5 items. It's not that it's too complex -- it's just that *trying* to do so -- to be a comprehensive means would be a hinderance in the long-run. Why does it NEED to be in text? If you haven't dug into fvwm (as an example), I can appreciate how you might think this so -- but there are a lot of aspects of fvwm that you just couldn't represent graphically. fvwm has hundreds of style options, and many focus policy hints. You can't enumerate these easily in such a way that the user could understand or know what they mean. Fvwm-themes does a good job at bridging this gap, mind. -- Thomas Adam ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:00:03PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Such as? You're implying that there's something magical going on without giving specifics upon which to discuss. No, I'm merely stating that with most WMs, the emphasis is on yourself to define how things are to operate -- and that you yourself have the freedom to do so. Which is no different than what I am doing save for in presentation. So where's the problem here? No. You know how it can be configured. Again, unless you're digging in the code, you don't know how it works. The point I am making is that Code? Oh, no. Just reading docs, examples, other people's configs, etc. Then you don't _know_ what is going on any more than I do? You are configuring it with the options given to you exactly the same I am doing. for a learning experience. Make it easy. If I need more than the basic application I can RTFM. It is your mentality which is why vi is so rough for people to learn up front even though IMHO a variant of vi(m) is one of the best damn editors out there and I use it religiously. Want to know why? *Because they made the easy things easy to find and learn.* The harder concepts I learn when I need to. That's a little harsh, isn't it? Especially to make assumptions about my mentality. Nope. It's spot on. Forcing people to learn loads up front to be productive is not as friendly, easy and productive as being able to learn what is needed, when it is needed and building on a basic set of skills which can be used immediately. D: in a manner which fits about 80% of my needs? Sure -- but it's still subjective. Which is not a bad thing, but it cannot be applied across the board. If that's what works for you, then that's nice. I don't see it as subjective. What I presented was not subjective, it was objective. Several less steps. Less change for breakage. Tell me, presuming a bad default configuration which prevents access to a shell through the X session and using a thin client for connectivity how exactly is one supposed to effect changes to the configuration file when one can't access the darned thing to modify in the first place? Having a good portion of the configuration inside the application itself, readily accessible does not preclude text file configuration. If you think it does, go try configuring Pine sometime. However, not having those tools can present problems. They should be there to provide a consistant interface within the application itself. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Steve C. Lamb: On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:09:31PM +0100, Clive Menzies wrote: I reckon ;) Having started with KDE and switched to xfce, it seems an excellent compromise. I tried a few WM's and icewm came close to what I was looking for but it was just a bit too light on frills and whistles. Whereas xfce has some really useful features without the bloat of KDE. I'm betting one of them is the launch bar. Loved it in KDE and when I had to regain some memory only XFCE4 had it. Can't understand how anyone can live without it. :D Sorry for my ignorance, but what is a launch bar? Is it Xfce's thing at the bottom of the desktop that shows menus and the like? What's so special about it? J. -- Tony Blair is a hypnotised self-seeking scarecrow just like all the rest. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:16:23PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: But I personally don't see how it is lacking if you have to use a text editor to change a menu entry -- I see it as just another means to achieve the same goal. Just because that means might not be how you wanted, that is not lacking; the functionality still exists. The default configuration for shell access is munged and doesn't work. You're using a thin-client with only the X session to work with. How do you edit the text file when you can't get to it? That's not lacking? The functionality does not exist. It can be obtained through other means but it is like saying that vim has a spell checker because one can install aspell and use the vimspell plugin. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:21:08PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See, Thomas pointed to a web page where a WM's text file configuration was defended because it was too complex to represent graphically. Yet in the above we have 5 items. It's not that it's too complex -- it's just that *trying* to do so -- to be a comprehensive means would be a hinderance in the long-run. Which is why I mentioned the 80% rule. Why leave this out when it is a fairly common operation that shouldd be made as simple as possible to do as it ties directly to the main thrust of the program; starting, managing and closing windows which contain applications! Why does it NEED to be in text? If you haven't dug into fvwm (as an example), I can appreciate how you might think this so -- but there are a lot of aspects of fvwm that you just couldn't represent graphically. fvwm has hundreds of style options, and many focus policy hints. Pardon me if I don't believe you when you say that the miriad of *graphical style options* can't be represented *graphically*. If they couldn't then they wouldn't exist, would they? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nope. It's spot on. Forcing people to learn loads up front to No, I've said, it's just another means to configure something. If something is predominately a text-based configuration, then that can be just as intuitive as a graphical one, IMO. I don't see it as subjective. What I presented was not subjective, it was objective. Several less steps. Less change for breakage. Tell me, presuming a bad default configuration which prevents access to a shell through the X session and using a thin client for connectivity how exactly is one supposed to effect changes to the configuration file when one can't access the darned thing to modify in the first place? Having a good portion of the Any editor will do at the console -- nano, jed, vim, emacs, etc. configuration inside the application itself, readily accessible does not preclude text file configuration. If you think it does, go try configuring I never said it did. -- Thomas Adam. ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Steve C. Lamb: On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:48:29PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: It's certainly pretty easy in Icewm. You just add a suitable line in the menu file and it then appears in the menu list when you press Ctrl-Esc. How are the lines added? With the right tool to do the job, of course - that means your $EDITOR. ;-) 1: type of menu item (program or folder) 2: The name to attribute to that item 3: The icon to associate with the item 4: The application/program to run 5: The command lines to pass on Oddly enough XFCE and KDE can manage a graphic representation of those 5 items. So, uh, where's the problem? Why does it NEED to be in text? It needs to be text so console junkies like me can change it with their text editor! ;-) That said, there /are/ programs just to edit menus, preferences and key bindings for IceWM. I do not like them and they are not neatly integrated into IceWM, but they are there. J. -- I eat meat and am concerned about bugs which are resistant to antibiotics. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pardon me if I don't believe you when you say that the miriad of *graphical style options* can't be represented *graphically*. If they couldn't then they wouldn't exist, would they? This one of those things you'd realise, if you used the WM in question. Trying to explain it otherwise, is tricky. -- Thomas Adam ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The default configuration for shell access is munged and doesn't work. You're using a thin-client with only the X session to work with. How do you edit the text file when you can't get to it? That's not lacking? The functionality does not exist. It can be obtained through other means but it is like saying that vim has a spell checker because one can install aspell and use the vimspell plugin. This has nothing to do with what I'm talking to. If you can't get to it, none of the options would work -- simple. That's not something neither you or a WM could do anything about. -- Thomas Adam ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:38:38PM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: Sorry for my ignorance, but what is a launch bar? Is it Xfce's thing at the bottom of the desktop that shows menus and the like? What's so special about it? XFCE calls it the Mini Command Line. KDE calls it something else which I am most likely misremembering as Launch Bar. It is not the panel at the bottom, it is a plugin for the panel which allows the user to enter a command as if it were on the CLI and have it executed. Neither the XFCE or KDE versions have tab compilation and only the KDE version has a history. Where it comes in handy is when I want to start something that I know the name of and that name isn't ungodly. For example, xchat. I've never made an icon, menu item or other such thing to start xchat. I put get a cursor in the MCL type xchat and return and up it comes. gaim, same thing. openoffice, same thing. In fact the only things in the panel as launch buttons are: My terminal: I never learned the command line for the GNOME Terminal and rxvt's command line which I have memorized is too long to type out every time. (rxvt -bg black -fg white -cr green -sl 1500) XFFM/Nautilus/Konqueror - Yes, one icon for each as it is a small menu. Never learned exactly what was needed for the first two and I am a cronic misspeller of the last one. Firefox: Because for some reason Debian's command line for it is mozilla-firefox which is too long for casual use. Thunderbird: same as above, mozilla-thunderbird? Guh. Azureus: Dunno why that's an icon, really. Hmmm, should remove that. Anyway the MCL pretty much takes care of anything else that I need at a moments notice without the need of opening up a terminal first. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Steve C. Lamb: KDE/XFCE: I want to start an application which I've just installed. I know the command name for it. Both have a launch bar. I enter the name, it starts up. Damn. That was easy! So easy in fact that 80% of the time I don't configure a launch button for any particular application. Me neither. I have under twenty keyboard shortcuts (all Win+single-character and most of them mnemonics) for the apps that I use most often. Want to do the same with a pure WM. Step 1: open a CLI. Step 2: enter the command name. Step 3: close the CLI. Step 4: realize I forgot ! at the end of the command. Step 5: reopen CLI. Step 6: type in the command name and !. Step 7: close CLI. Well, to start gui programs I do not have a keyboard shortcut for, I just hit Win-Space and IceWM gives me a little command line. It couldn't be much easier. And btw: if you are using terminals a lot, you don't need a separate one just for starting a gui app. I think one big difference between our usage patterns is that I prefer to use the keyboard for every action. That may not sound user friendly but it's very efficient, especially when I use my laptop (which is 99% of the time I spend using a computer outside of my workplace). I guess if I used my desktop always with a mouse in the rigth hand, I would prefer configuration via a gui too. J. -- I feel yawning hollowness whilst talking to people at parties. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:47:19PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nope. It's spot on. Forcing people to learn loads up front to No, I've said, it's just another means to configure something. If something is predominately a text-based configuration, then that can be just as intuitive as a graphical one, IMO. Not true. To configure with a text file I have to know far more than I need to know with internal configuration. a: Where the configuration is located. b: The format in which the configuration is expected. c: The possible potions the configuration file expects. Internal configuration mitigates A and B and can provide prompts for C. For example in XFWM I can double click the menu bar to shade the window, close the window, minimize the window or have it be ignored. All that information was presented to me in a simple dropdown. Granted this could be imparted in the configuration file through the use of comments but that makes many configuration files completely unwieldly. Squid's configuration file is a prime example for that. o.O Several less steps. Less change for breakage. Tell me, presuming a bad default configuration which prevents access to a shell through the X session and using a thin client for connectivity how exactly is one supposed to effect changes to the configuration file when one can't access the darned thing to modify in the first place? Any editor will do at the console -- nano, jed, vim, emacs, etc. You're not grasping the scenerio I described. One, I might add, I didn't ull out of my ass because I ran into it while working on a thin client implementation. Let me explain. Bad configuration which prevents access to shell through the X session: No shell via X. None. You hit it and because of a typo in the configuration file the shell does not start. Using a thin client: IE, it provides a display for remote applications to use but does not have a console of its own. VNC being the most recognizable but a hardware X thin client is not out of the question. So, nano, jed, vim, emacs, etc all *are useless because you can't use any of them as there is no access to them*. configuration inside the application itself, readily accessible does not preclude text file configuration. If you think it does, go try configuring I never said it did. Sure are acting like it. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. To configure with a text file I have to know far more than I need to know with internal configuration. a: Where the configuration is located. True. b: The format in which the configuration is expected. Which, if you're lucky is in some sort of human-readable form. c: The possible potions the configuration file expects. Which, assuming b. is half-decent, you can usually ascertain. Although, granted, not always. was presented to me in a simple dropdown. Granted this could be imparted in the configuration file through the use of comments but that makes many configuration files completely unwieldly. Squid's configuration file is a prime example for that. o.O Yes, but squid's config excells with the use of comments. It explains everything I needed to know -- giving both explanation and examples, where it was necessary. And the defaults are generally not too bad. Had the comments not been in the configuration file, I'd have had to read the manual -- something many wouldn't do, I'd imagine -- especially if they need to use or set it up quickly. So I thought the comments helped. Unweildly? Perhaps. Sure are acting like it. Welcome to a text-based medium. Ambiguity, anyone? -- Thomas Adam. ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: Me neither. I have under twenty keyboard shortcuts (all Win+single-character and most of them mnemonics) for the apps that I use most often. Ye gads. Never understood that fetish as surely one will eventually step on some application's keys or an un-intentional key combo. Like, for example, having ALT mapped to some function in a first person shooter and then hitting TAB to access another function and suddenly be staring at the desktop. :D Well, to start gui programs I do not have a keyboard shortcut for, I just hit Win-Space and IceWM gives me a little command line. It couldn't be much easier. That's new. :D And btw: if you are using terminals a lot, you don't need a separate one just for starting a gui app. Presumes one is at the CLI on a terminal which is at the local machine, not in several situations where X isn't available and remembers ! the first time around. :P I think one big difference between our usage patterns is that I prefer to use the keyboard for every action. Careful, you're assuming a lot of my usage habits. So says I writing this in vim to be handled by mutt while inside a GNOME terminal on my laptop connected to my server at home. :P That may not sound user friendly but it's very efficient, especially when I use my laptop (which is 99% of the time I spend using a computer outside of my workplace). I guess if I used my desktop always with a mouse in the rigth hand, I would prefer configuration via a gui too. I just don't see how the miniscule efficiencies amount to much of anything when they are negated by odd quirks elsewhere. In the time it takes to fire up a CLI, editor and edit a text file to add a menu item I can do it far faster with the nipple and rmb even if my hands dare to leave the home row. ;P -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:49:18PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: This one of those things you'd realise, if you used the WM in question. Trying to explain it otherwise, is tricky. Again pardon me if I don't believe you when you say that something which you cannot explain to me through text is best configured through text. That implies that it is explained and understood in text. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:50:58PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: This has nothing to do with what I'm talking to. If you can't get to it, none of the options would work -- simple. That's not something neither you or a WM could do anything about. Incorrect. If the WM allowed the person to modify it's own configuration that is exactly something the WM could address. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Incorrect. If the WM allowed the person to modify it's own configuration that is exactly something the WM could address. Well, the WM would save that data somewhere. If it can't reach it, at best, one would hope the WM fell back to some internal defaults. -- Thomas Adam. ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:13:54PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: b: The format in which the configuration is expected. Which, if you're lucky is in some sort of human-readable form. That's not the only consideration. Take for example where one program requires the use of quotes around the options while others they are optional while a third would consider the quotes part of the option. So... path_to = /some/file path_to = /some/file ...could work in the first form, the second form or both forms. Yet all are human readable. c: The possible potions the configuration file expects. Which, assuming b. is half-decent, you can usually ascertain. Although, granted, not always. Which I pointed out. Sure are acting like it. Welcome to a text-based medium. Ambiguity, anyone? I'm betting that wouldn't happen in a graphical medium. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Steve C. Lamb: On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: Me neither. I have under twenty keyboard shortcuts (all Win+single-character and most of them mnemonics) for the apps that I use most often. Ye gads. Never understood that fetish as surely one will eventually step on some application's keys or an un-intentional key combo. Like, for example, having ALT mapped to some function in a first person shooter and then hitting TAB to access another function and suddenly be staring at the desktop. :D Never had a problem with that. It's only Gnome and IceWM that I have sometimes seen fighting who may catch the keypresses. But well, as I have already predicted, I ditched Gnome just yesterday. Well, to start gui programs I do not have a keyboard shortcut for, I just hit Win-Space and IceWM gives me a little command line. It couldn't be much easier. That's new. :D I think it was already there when I started using IceWM (~4 years ago)! Unfortunately, it lacks Tab-completion and history. What I like is that when you finish the command with Ctrl-Enter the command is started inside a terminal. Very handy for things like 'top'. I think one big difference between our usage patterns is that I prefer to use the keyboard for every action. Careful, you're assuming a lot of my usage habits. So says I writing this in vim to be handled by mutt while inside a GNOME terminal on my laptop connected to my server at home. :P I am using PuTTY ssh'ing to my home machine running a screen session with mutt and vim. :-P That may not sound user friendly but it's very efficient, especially when I use my laptop (which is 99% of the time I spend using a computer outside of my workplace). I guess if I used my desktop always with a mouse in the rigth hand, I would prefer configuration via a gui too. I just don't see how the miniscule efficiencies amount to much of anything when they are negated by odd quirks elsewhere. In the time it takes to fire up a CLI, editor and edit a text file to add a menu item I can do it far faster with the nipple and rmb even if my hands dare to leave the home row. Well then, it's obviously just a matter of taste and we should stop arguing. :-) J. -- If I could travel in time I would show my minidisc to the Romans and become Caesar until the batteries ran out. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Steve C. Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again pardon me if I don't believe you when you say that something which you cannot explain to me through text is best configured through text. That implies that it is explained and understood in text. OK. I'll try. In FVWM, windows can have a lot of style hints applied to them. Here's a list of them: BorderWidth, HandleWidth, NoIcon / Icon, MiniIcon, IconBox, IconGrid, IconFill, IconSize, NoTitle / Title, TitleAtBottom / TitleAtLeft / TitleAtRight / TitleAtTop, LeftTitleRotatedCW / LeftTitleRotatedCCW, RightTitleRotatedCCW / RightTitleRotatedCW, TopTitleRotated / TopTitleNotRotated, BottomTitleRotated / Bot- tomTitleNotRotated, !UseTitleDecorRotation / UseTitleDecorRota- tion, StippledTitle / StippledTitleOff, IndexedWindowName / ExactWindowName, IndexedIconName / ExactIconName, !Borders / Borders, NoHandles / Handles, WindowListSkip / WindowListHit, CirculateSkip / CirculateHit, CirculateSkipShaded / Circulate- HitShaded, Layer, StaysOnTop / StaysOnBottom / StaysPut, Sticky / Slippery, StickyAcrossPages / !StickyAcrossPages, Sticky- AcrossDesks / !StickyAcrossDesks, StartIconic / StartNormal, Color, ForeColor, BackColor, Colorset, HilightFore, HilightBack, HilightColorset, BorderColorset, HilightBorderColorset, IconTi- tleColorset, HilightIconTitleColorset, IconBackgroundColorset, IconTitleRelief, IconBackgroundRelief, IconBackgroundPadding, Font, IconFont, StartsOnDesk / StartsOnPage / StartsAnyWhere, StartsOnScreen, ManualPlacementHonorsStartsOnPage / ManualPlace- mentIgnoresStartsOnPage,CaptureHonorsStartsOnPage / Cap- tureIgnoresStartsOnPage, RecaptureHonorsStartsOnPage / Recap- tureIgnoresStartsOnPage, StartsOnPageIncludesTransients / Start- sOnPageIgnoresTransients, IconTitle / NoIconTitle, MwmButtons / FvwmButtons, MwmBorder / FvwmBorder, MwmDecor / NoDecorHint, MwmFunctions / NoFuncHint, HintOverride / NoOverride, NoButton / Button, ResizeHintOverride / NoResizeOverride, OLDecor / NoOLD- ecor, GNOMEUseHints / GNOMEIgnoreHints, StickyIcon / SlipperyI- con, StickyAcrossPagesIcon / !StickyAcrossPagesIcon, Sticky- AcrossDesksIcon / !StickyAcrossDesksIcon, ManualPlacement / Cas- cadePlacement / MinOverlapPlacement / MinOverlapPercentPlacement / TileManualPlacement / TileCascadePlacement, / CenterPlacement, MinOverlapPlacementPenalties, MinOverlapPercentPlacementPenal- ties, DecorateTransient / NakedTransient, DontRaiseTransient / RaiseTransient, DontLowerTransient / LowerTransient, DontStack- TransientParent / StackTransientParent, SkipMapping / ShowMap- ping, ScatterWindowGroups / KeepWindowGroupsOnDesk, UseDecor, UseStyle, NoPPosition / UsePPosition, NoUSPosition / UseUSPosi- tion, NoTransientPPosition / UseTransientPPosition, NoTransien- tUSPosition / UseTransientUSPosition, NoIconPosition / UseIcon- Position, Lenience / NoLenience, ClickToFocus / SloppyFocus / MouseFocus|FocusFollowsMouse / NeverFocus, ClickToFocusPass- esClickOff / ClickToFocusPassesClick, ClickToFocusRaisesOff / ClickToFocusRaises, MouseFocusClickRaises / MouseFocusClickRais- esOff, GrabFocus / GrabFocusOff, GrabFocusTransientOff / GrabFo- cusTransient,FPFocusClickButtons, FPFocusClickModifiers, !FPSortWindowlistByFocus / FPSortWindowlistByFocus, FPClickRais- esFocused / !FPClickRaisesFocused, FPClickDecorRaisesFocused / !FPClickDecorRaisesFocused, FPClickIconRaisesFocused / !FPClick- IconRaisesFocused, !FPClickRaisesUnfocused / FPClickRaisesUnfo- cused, FPClickDecorRaisesUnfocused / !FPClickDecorRaisesUnfo- cused, FPClickIconRaisesUnfocused / !FPClickIconRaisesUnfocused, FPClickToFocus/ !FPClickToFocus, FPClickDecorToFocus / !FPClickDecorToFocus, FPClickIconToFocus / !FPClickIconToFocus, !FPEnterToFocus / FPEnterToFocus, !FPLeaveToUnfocus / FPLeave- ToUnfocus, !FPFocusByProgram / FPFocusByProgram, !FPFocusByFunc- tion / FPFocusByFunction, FPFocusByFunctionWarpPointer / !FPFo- cusByFunctionWarpPointer, FPLenient / !FPLenient, !FPPassFo- cusClick / FPPassFocusClick, !FPPassRaiseClick / FPPass- RaiseClick, FPIgnoreFocusClickMotion / !FPIgnoreFocusClickMo- tion, FPIgnoreRaiseClickMotion / !FPIgnoreRaiseClickMotion, !FPAllowFocusClickFunction / FPAllowFocusClickFunction, !FPAl- lowRaiseClickFunction / FPAllowRaiseClickFunction, FPGrabFocus / !FPGrabFocus, !FPGrabFocusTransient / FPGrabFocusTransient, FPOverrideGrabFocus / !FPOverrideGrabFocus, FPReleaseFocus / !FPReleaseFocus, !FPReleaseFocusTransient / FPReleaseFocusTran- sient, FPOverrideReleaseFocus / !FPOverrideReleaseFocus, Start- sLowered / StartsRaised, IgnoreRestack / AllowRestack, FixedPo- sition / VariablePosition, FixedUSPosition / VariableUSPosition, FixedPPosition / VariablePPosition, FixedSize / VariableSize, FixedUSSize / VariableUSSize, FixedPSize / VariablePSize, !Clos- able / Closable, !Iconifiable / Iconifiable, !Maximizable / Max- imizable,
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Bill Wohler wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I used twm/awm back in the eighties. I've been using enlightenment for years now though. I tried wmaker and sawfish but they lacked features from enlightenment that I discovered I really missed. If you've loved enlightenment and found an even better WM, please let me know. [...] Hi everyone I can absolutely acknowledge that. I've been using enlightenment for five years now and don't know of any better window manager. Bill already listed most of the great features so let me say something on performance: I'm using enlightenment on a few machines ranging from a notebook with 133MHz and 48Mb of memory to my office machine with 3GHz and 1GB of memory. The felt performance is roughly the same on every machine, even with all the nice features turned on. The above mentioned office machine has an uptime of a few month now and enlightenment is using a total of 4.2MB now. :-o If you are more into numbers you can have a look at http://www.rasterman.com/ Cheers, Nikolai -- 1984 is not a howto! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 14 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: Well, to start gui programs I do not have a keyboard shortcut for, I just hit Win-Space and IceWM gives me a little command line. It couldn't be much easier. That's new. :D I think it was already there when I started using IceWM (~4 years ago)! Unfortunately, it lacks Tab-completion and history. What I like is that when you finish the command with Ctrl-Enter the command is started inside a terminal. Very handy for things like 'top'. This has me a bit confused. What is this Win-Space? So you mean the double-height Taskbar? Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Microsoft-free zone|| books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Thank you all for so much feedback. I will be looking at a few different WM's and will make my choice eventually. I think xwinman.org is a great starting point, thank you for the tip. I'm glad that there are still many users of 'traditional' window managers out there :) Herminio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 06:25:08 -0300 Rogério Brito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 12 2005, Steve Lamb wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I'd say give XFCE4 a try. While I generally use KDE it wasn't practical on my laptop w/only 192Mb of RAM. But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. I used fluxbox for quite a while after having unresolved dissappearing menu trouble with KDE.. Now I'm using Windowmaker and it's great.. BUT.. I do miss those tabbed windows.. -- Cheers: Mike .. Now, a little humor compliments of Linux Fortune...
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 09:07:34 +0100 Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jochen Schulz wrote: A window manager is a program that just manages windows. It gives applications an area on the screen where they can be displayed and most often the WM draws a border around it, gives it a nice title and enables the user to do things with these windows - put one on the foreground, minimize another one etc. Very often window managers come with some kind of a panel, virtual desktop support and some kind of application launcher (a start menu or icons on the panel), but strictly speaking, this is exceeding the task of a minimal WM. Desktop environments (KDE, Gnome. Xfce) do far more than that. They come with a file manager, draw the background with pixmaps and icons, they do some work behind your back to easily handle removable storage or enable drag'n drop. They come with control centers to do system administration and generally give the user a simplified, cleaned up view on their system. Applications supporting the DE all look the same and share a lot of routines to do common tasks. DEs also provide applications with a way to register themselves for a filetype which they can handle, which is then reflected when using the DE's file manager and so on... Of course, this list is not complete. Actually thats not completly true. File type registration is done through /etc/mailcap and ~/.mailcap. Drawing background with pixmap and/or color can be done using xsetroot (or a bunch of others also) through .xsession for example. Icons on the desktop can be handled by most window managers, but if you want a desktop environment with folders, drag and drop and such you can always use rox filer. There are several stand alone toolbars and docks that can handle KDE, Gnome and other dock applets (which use a standard interface) and the window manager contacts the desktop environment through a standard interface nowadays (you can switch the gnome standard window manager with a bunch of others, and even KDE). There are even several daemons that can handle removable storage. I've heard of people running both gnome and kde over fvwm among others. What I don't like about gnome and kde is that they both start a setting daemon, file polling daemon and a few others in the background and they don't die easily (some stay after you log out). Too much overhead. Personally I am a fvwm fan, it can take some time to setup to your liking but can be setup to do just about anything. The only thing that its a bit problematic with is window tabs (grouping several unrelated windows together). It has a plugin thats not bad but it requires perl which bumps up the memory requirements. My fvwm setup takes about 2.5 megs of memory (thats right) and the whole machine with X, urxvt and screen comes up at a bit under 30 megs (compare that to about 120 for win2k and 180 for winxp ;-) Interesting, thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] +++ This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System at the Tel-Aviv University CC. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:59:47AM -0700, Steve C. Lamb wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:56:46PM +0100, Simon Huggins wrote: I need to compile up 4.2.2 packages for sarge and bung them on the alioth page at some point. Mmmm, upgrades. I really should see if there's something later than 4.0.6 out. :D If you're on x86 then http://the.earth.li/~huggie/xfce4/ might just work for you. Simon. -- oOoOoDeja Moo - the feeling you've heard this bull before. oOoOo oOoOooOoOo oOoOo oOoOo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 03:38:04PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Hi, I used a sun a few years ago and XFCE kind of reminds me of what it had (CDE?). Cheers, Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! `$' $' $ $ _ ,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$b $,d$$b ,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ ' `$ $$' `$ $$ $ $$g$ $ $ $ ,$P $ $$ `$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $$ `Y$$P'$. `YP $$$P' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Jun 12 2005, Steve Lamb wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I'd say give XFCE4 a try. While I generally use KDE it wasn't practical on my laptop w/only 192Mb of RAM. But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. Cheers, Rogério Brito. -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. My favorite has always been icewm. Very fast, and simple, but very configurable. Agreed. I use it, too. What I like most about IceWM is, erm, it's window managing capabilities! You can easily toggle fullscreen display of any application (fullscreen, not only maximized), make it appear on every desktop, make it appear in the tray and not in the regular window list (where you Alt-Tab through) and so on. If you want that to be permanent, you have to write it down in a config file but it's really not that hard and you can restart IceWM without logging out. Another advantage of IceWM is the smart window placement option. I really hate how windows are placed in MS Windows (sometimes cascaded, sometimes abritrary, sometimes the applications themselves remember their position...) and some window managers for Linux do it alike (Metacity, for example is really bad). IceWM always uses the position for a new window with minimum overlap over other windows. I really miss this feature when using other window managers. Of course you can use IceWM completely with your keyboard. Many actions are reached through well known Shortcuts like Alt-F4 (close window), Alt-Tab or Alt-Space (for window menu - if you cannot remember the shortcut you wanted to use). It should even be easy to use for windows converts. I really tried using other window managers in the last approx. 4 years, but I always returned to IceWM. Currently I am trying to use it in conjunction with Gnome, but Gnome makes the login process so slow that I will probably ditch it again. J. -- People talking a foreign language are romantic and mysterious. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 06:25:08AM -0300, Rogério Brito wrote: On Jun 12 2005, Steve Lamb wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I'd say give XFCE4 a try. While I generally use KDE it wasn't practical on my laptop w/only 192Mb of RAM. But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. Some window managers blur the lines a bit anyway by including menus or panels etc that you can't get rid of. Xfce is very modular so you can just run the window manager (xfwm4) or you could run the window manager and the xfdesttop (for the root screen and the menu when you right click on the root screen) or you could run the panel as well as xfwm4 etc. /plug Simon. -- [ If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 13 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: [snip] I really tried using other window managers in the last approx. 4 years, but I always returned to IceWM. Currently I am trying to use it in conjunction with Gnome, but Gnome makes the login process so slow that I will probably ditch it again. Since we've started on this thread, I have to say that this is my experience too - I've always come back to Icewm after trying others. I don't use either KDE or Gnome so I don't know how it interacts with them. Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Microsoft-free zone|| books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Rogério Brito wrote: On Jun 12 2005, Steve Lamb wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I'd say give XFCE4 a try. While I generally use KDE it wasn't practical on my laptop w/only 192Mb of RAM. But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. Educate me: what's the difference? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Educate me: what's the difference? A Desktop Environment provides a full framework of integrated applications (such as a file manager, office applications, etc.) that all share the same theme. Often common options applied to one program, will affect the other components, because they're related. A Window Manager, on the other hand, does just that -- it manages windows. It doesn't dictate a file manager -- if you want one, you can use one. There's no interoperability or common functions shared between programs, like there is with DEs. It certainly provides a great deal more flexibility. So in that way, WMs are much faster, and most WMs are damn good at managing the windows mapped to them. -- Thomas Adam The Linux Weekend Mechanic -- http://linuxgazette.net TAG Editor -- http://linuxgazette.net shrug We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :) -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Monday 13 Jun 2005 17:35, Thomas Adam wrote: So in that way, WMs are much faster, and most WMs are damn good at managing the windows mapped to them. That's debatable, actually. It could be argued that, since desktop environments *do* share libraries etc, they reduce redundancy and therefore memory and load times. One could even argue that, since the code in question is shared by different projects, it's more likely to have many eyes scanning it for opportunities to optimise code. -- Lee. Please do not CC replies directly to me. I'll read them on the list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Adam Funk: Rogério Brito wrote: But neither XFCE nor KDE are window managers. They are desktop environments. This is a common misconception among people discussing graphical environments for X. Educate me: what's the difference? A window manager is a program that just manages windows. It gives applications an area on the screen where they can be displayed and most often the WM draws a border around it, gives it a nice title and enables the user to do things with these windows - put one on the foreground, minimize another one etc. Very often window managers come with some kind of a panel, virtual desktop support and some kind of application launcher (a start menu or icons on the panel), but strictly speaking, this is exceeding the task of a minimal WM. Desktop environments (KDE, Gnome. Xfce) do far more than that. They come with a file manager, draw the background with pixmaps and icons, they do some work behind your back to easily handle removable storage or enable drag'n drop. They come with control centers to do system administration and generally give the user a simplified, cleaned up view on their system. Applications supporting the DE all look the same and share a lot of routines to do common tasks. DEs also provide applications with a way to register themselves for a filetype which they can handle, which is then reflected when using the DE's file manager and so on... Of course, this list is not complete. J. -- I wear a lot of leather but would never wear fur. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Hi, Ditto on WMaker. The big thing that drew me to it was the fond memories I had of using NeXTStep on some NeXT machines in high school. It truly was a joy to use. I must say that WMaker does an outstanding job of replicating the interface. WindowMaker is the best... it doesn't seem to be under development anymore though... am i wrong? Cameron Matheson
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Lee Braiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's debatable, actually. It could be argued that, since desktop environments *do* share libraries etc, they reduce redundancy and therefore memory and load times. One could even argue that, since the code in Heh. When was the last time you tried to load KDE or GNOME? They take an absolute age, pulling in I don't know what -- and whats more, the case of KDE that loads a lot of libs for applications, whether you use them or not. But then, this discussion doesn't change the difference between a DE or a WM. -- Thomas Adam ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:35:23PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Educate me: what's the difference? A Window Manager, on the other hand, does just that -- it manages windows. It doesn't dictate a file manager -- if you want one, you can use one. There's no interoperability or common functions shared between programs, like there is with DEs. It certainly provides a great deal more flexibility. So in that way, WMs are much faster, and most WMs are damn good at managing the windows mapped to them. Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) Yes, yes, ok, I'll stop plugging it now. I need to compile up 4.2.2 packages for sarge and bung them on the alioth page at some point. Simon. -- oOoOo Even if it does matter, does it matter that it matters? - oOoOo oOoOo Marvin oOoOo oOoOo oOoOo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Anthony Campbell: On 13 Jun 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote: I really tried using other window managers in the last approx. 4 years, but I always returned to IceWM. Currently I am trying to use it in conjunction with Gnome, but Gnome makes the login process so slow that I will probably ditch it again. Since we've started on this thread, I have to say that this is my experience too - I've always come back to Icewm after trying others. I don't use either KDE or Gnome so I don't know how it interacts with them. I don't know about KDE, but IceWM and Gnome work quite ok. The Gnome workspace switcher recognizes the current desktop and you can tweak IceWM's winoptions file to ignore the panel and all this other stuff. That's about it. ;-) If you tell nautilus not to draw the desktop you can even use root-tail and torsmo together with Gnome. J. -- When I am at nightclubs I enjoy looking at other people and assessing their imagined problems. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) In that sense, then perhaps. But XFCE4's only good thing is that it has plenty of eye-candy. You can't do a thing with it other than that. -- Thomas Adam. The Linux Weekend Mechanic -- http://linuxgazette.net TAG Editor -- http://linuxgazette.net shrug We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :) -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:56:46 +0100 Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) Having been a loyal IceWM user since Potato was new I recently switched to Xfce4 to see what it could do for me. Well, IceWM has /never/ crashed on me in all that time. Last week Xfce4 crashed on me five times. Other than that, yes, it's a good compromise*. I've gone back to the tried and true IceWM. * Maybe that should be spelled, /con/promise. Cybe R. Wizard -- Q: What's the difference between MicroSoft Windows and a virus? A: Apart from the fact that viruses are supported by their authors, use optimized, small code and usually perform well, none. Winduhs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On (13/06/05 17:56), Simon Huggins wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:35:23PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Educate me: what's the difference? A Window Manager, on the other hand, does just that -- it manages windows. It doesn't dictate a file manager -- if you want one, you can use one. There's no interoperability or common functions shared between programs, like there is with DEs. It certainly provides a great deal more flexibility. So in that way, WMs are much faster, and most WMs are damn good at managing the windows mapped to them. Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) I reckon ;) Having started with KDE and switched to xfce, it seems an excellent compromise. I tried a few WM's and icewm came close to what I was looking for but it was just a bit too light on frills and whistles. Whereas xfce has some really useful features without the bloat of KDE. Regards Clive -- www.clivemenzies.co.uk ... ...strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:00:18PM -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: Do you have a real name? I always like to know who I'm talking to. On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:56:46 +0100 Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) Having been a loyal IceWM user since Potato was new I recently switched to Xfce4 to see what it could do for me. Well, IceWM has /never/ crashed on me in all that time. Last week Xfce4 crashed on me five times. Other than that, yes, it's a good compromise*. I've gone back to the tried and true IceWM. How did you manage that? The panel plugins aren't sandboxed which can cause problems if the plugins have bugs. Which ones did you have installed? I must admit I didn't see your bug report in the BTS despite getting all of them for all the packages. Perhaps you can point me at it? Simon. -- [ Rule six: There is no... rule six. - Monty Python ] Black Cat Networks. http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 07:09:00PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does that mean that xfce4 is a good compromise then between both of these concepts given you can install as many or as few of the components as you like once you have the basic libraries installed? ;) In that sense, then perhaps. But XFCE4's only good thing is that it has plenty of eye-candy. You can't do a thing with it other than that. I understand that a window manager/desktop environment is a personal choice but saying you can't do a thing with it is just wrong; it satisfies my requirements well. I wouldn't have put so much time into fixing up the packages for Debian if I didn't think it was useful. -- ,--huggie-at-earth-dot-listuff-thing-stuff--DF5CE2B4--. _| Cerulean is a gentle breeze... - Pusher |_ | | `- http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ - http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ -' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: satisfies my requirements well. I wouldn't have put so much time into fixing up the packages for Debian if I didn't think it was useful. That's nice that you spend time on it -- and if it suits you, then all well and good. When I used it, it seemed to crash a lot, and offered not a lot in terms of focus or placement policies in comparsion to other WMs (and some DEs). But I can see why people like it. -- Thomas Adam ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. My favorite has always been icewm. Very fast, and simple, but very configurable. I second that. Everything can be done on the keyboard, and it's quick to start up. Every so often, I'll pop into something else (gnome, xfce, kde (ugh) rat poisen as of late), but I always come back to IceWM and the grin returns. EP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Thanks for your attention, Herminio Gonzalez I would like to recommend WindowMaker (wmaker). It's extremely fast, light on RAM, and although not really what they call a Desktop Environment, I can't find much of anything it can't do. IIRC it takes about 4MB RAM when loaded, so you can imagine how fast it will run and load on your machine. Anecdotally, my wife and 2 kids have all abandoned Gnome and KDE for WMaker as their interface of choice. Another one that I've heard about is xfce but I didn't think that much of it. Although nice, it didn't offer enough for me to consider moving. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Cam wrote: Hi, Ditto on WMaker. The big thing that drew me to it was the fond memories I had of using NeXTStep on some NeXT machines in high school. It truly was a joy to use. I must say that WMaker does an outstanding job of replicating the interface. WindowMaker is the best... it doesn't seem to be under development anymore though... am i wrong? Cameron Matheson I think you are wrong. 10/26/2004 was their last product release. I would say they are still active. Mailing lists seem alive. Last post was June 11. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: And just as good if you do maximize windows -- like me. I usually have one to four maximized windows on each of 10 desktops. What I like most about WindowMaker is its configurability. Recent versions of KDE have, perhaps, caught up with it. That may be, but there's a lot of memory footprint difference. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:49:45 +0100 Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:00:18PM -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote: ... Last week Xfce4 crashed on me five times. Other than that, yes, it's a good compromise*. I've gone back to the tried and true IceWM. How did you manage that? The panel plugins aren't sandboxed which can cause problems if the plugins have bugs. Which ones did you have installed? I must admit I didn't see your bug report in the BTS despite getting all of them for all the packages. Perhaps you can point me at it? Simon. Crashed is probably the wrong term. It locked up to the point that I couldn't ctrlaltF* to a console in order to shut it down although ctrlaltbackspace still worked to kill it. I installed every plugin I could find, isn't that the Proper Thing To DO? As for a bug report, I just went right back to what works for me and didn't feel right intruding into the operations of a package I don't typically use and of which I might not know the inside workings very well. Besides, I fear appearing too very foolish if there is an easy and obvious fix that I'm just too dense to find. Perhaps I should have devoted more time to it and filed that report, but, oh well. Now had it been Ice... Cybe R. Wizard -- If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. - Isaac Asimov -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Request for window manager recommendations
Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Thanks for your attention, Herminio Gonzalez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Try: 1. w9wm (it is cool) 2. fluxbox 3. ion I am sure there are others.. -ishwar On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Thanks for your attention, Herminio Gonzalez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Monday 13 June 2005 00:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Well -- I like wmaker, so that'd be my recommendation. Quite lightweight, a part of the GNU project, and awesome if you never maximize windows -- like me. :) Screenshots at http://www.windowmaker.org/gallery.html. Regards, Anders Breindahl/skrewz. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:39:48AM +0200, Anders Breindahl wrote: Well -- I like wmaker, so that'd be my recommendation. Quite lightweight, a part of the GNU project, and awesome if you never maximize windows -- like me. :) Screenshots at http://www.windowmaker.org/gallery.html. Ditto on WMaker. The big thing that drew me to it was the fond memories I had of using NeXTStep on some NeXT machines in high school. It truly was a joy to use. I must say that WMaker does an outstanding job of replicating the interface. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr pgpyODQc20D3d.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 03:38:04PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. openbox -- it's very small, fast and configurable. J. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
--- Jeronimo Pellegrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 03:38:04PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. openbox -- it's very small, fast and configurable. We get this question from time to time, and all the replies are usually meaningless, because of the biasedness in the reply. What would distinguish it, from Just Another Poll, would be the likely things you want from other WMs that your current DE/WM does not provide. That said, I personally use fvwm as my WM and have done so for a number of years. I don't need nor want the bloat and hideousness that GNOME and KDE seem hell-bent on running. But then they're DEs and not WMs. Perhaps the best place to look would be here: http://www.xwinman.org it has to be my most favourite website. -- Thomas Adam. ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On Jun 12 2005, Ishwar Rattan wrote: 2. fluxbox I also recommend fluxbox, especially when used with the Minimal style. It is quite functional and lightweight. I measured its memory consumption and that of openbox (which was claimed to be faster and lighter) and I could not find any difference between the two. So, I vote for fluxbox, which I have already been using for quite some time and am pretty satisfied with it. Before using fluxbox, I used to use Window Maker, but the problem is that I wanted more space for my space and the dock is either occupying horizontal space or hidden by maximized windows. With fluxbox, I don't have this problem, since I can use the very same applets that I am used to and fluxbox's dock (it's called slit) has an autohide function that works the way I want (i.e., it hides itself and comes to foreground when I move the mouse cursor on it). I also have some handy keyboard shortcuts and I rarely need to use the mouse, but I can, if I want. Hope this helps, Rogério Brito. -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 2005-06-13, Anders Breindahl wrote: On Monday 13 June 2005 00:38, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. Well -- I like wmaker, so that'd be my recommendation. Quite lightweight, a part of the GNU project, and awesome if you never maximize windows -- like me. :) And just as good if you do maximize windows -- like me. I usually have one to four maximized windows on each of 10 desktops. What I like most about WindowMaker is its configurability. Recent versions of KDE have, perhaps, caught up with it. -- Chris F.A. Johnson http://cfaj.freeshell.org == Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach, 2005, Apress http://www.torfree.net/~chris/books/cfaj/ssr.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. My favorite has always been icewm. Very fast, and simple, but very configurable. This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I used twm/awm back in the eighties. I've been using enlightenment for years now though. I tried wmaker and sawfish but they lacked features from enlightenment that I discovered I really missed. If you've loved enlightenment and found an even better WM, please let me know. Here are some of those features: Sloppy focus. I *hate* click to type. I also hate it when setting the focus brings the window to the top, occluding the window that you're referencing. While you can set these things in Enlightenment, you can also *not* set them. Nice iconbox. My iconbox has a transparent background, does not have borders and grows and shrinks as necessary. It uses the application's icons. Virtual desktops. I have three virtual desktops. There is a little pager window that shows your windows in miniature which you can click to view or drag between desktops. Decorations. You can opt not to have any window decorations. Good for XMMS, xfaces, asclock, and transparent terminal windows. Explicit memory. Enlightenment can remember the applications size, location, decoration, stacking style (always on top, bottom, or normal). Opaque move and resize. Only way to really see the effects of your actions. Mouse gestures and keyboard shortcuts. Alt-tab menu. Alt-tab brings up a menu of the window titles and also brings the selected window to the top. The combination makes switching applications very fast. -- Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.newt.com/wohler/ GnuPG ID:610BD9AD Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian! If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I'd say give XFCE4 a try. While I generally use KDE it wasn't practical on my laptop w/only 192Mb of RAM. I tried different WMs and found most to be either too bare bones, ugly or plain unusable. XFCE4's got the perfect mix of small size, configurability and usability. Barring XFCE4 I'd say give icewm a whirl as well. I was a big icewm fan until KDE and now XFCE4. It's lightweight, looks good but isn't as easily configured as the latter two. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
On 12 Jun 2005 15:38:04 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. They do take up more resources than lightweight window managers, but if your box has the capability of handling the extra load - in terms of RAM and CPU - then I don't see any reason not to use them. Personally, I've been a big fan of KDE (yes, I could probably live without it) since practically its inception. The load time - at least to me - is a rather specious argument. Most people, I would think, would keep the WM up and running as long as the box is (personally, this box has been up for nearly four months, and I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've restarted X/KDE). (I don't have or use a laptop, and I realize that wouldn't really apply to those people on laptops.) If you're new to Debian (or Linux systems in general) than KDE can give you the best of both worlds - a command line for you to use, and a graphical way to do things. I personally find advantages to both methods. Loading, in general, has gotten a lot better than it used to be. Yet I see this argument come up from time to time as a detraction against some system, or app, or what have you. It's a factor if you start an app, do things in it, and then close it when you are done, but do people without a lot of DOS/Windows baggage really run apps that way anymore? (I confess I do to an extent, but I was a longtime DOS/Windows user -- and in that environment you basically run apps that way.) A personal recommendation of your favourite window manager would be much appreciated. I don't really like GNOME. That's just a personal feeling; I just find it a bit more clunky in comparison with KDE. But there are some others to consider. xfce, rox, fluxbox, and so on. olvwm is probably around but I haven't tried it in years. (olvwm is ancient, but very reminiscent, I suppose, of older Sun wiindow managers. I can't speak from experience there, since pretty much all the Unix I've done is Linux, with a smattering of earlier *BSD. Herminio Gonzalez -- David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Request for window manager recommendations
on Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 03:38:04PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Have just finished installing sarge (am a first-time debian user, very impressed), and now am chosing a window manager. I have fond memories of using a little-known WM called VTWM on SunOS, but that was almost 10 years ago now. I'm guessing the are other, at least equally noteworthy WM's around. vtwm's still around. You can get a general sense of various WMs at the Window Managers for X page: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/ Not so keen on KDE/GNOME because as I understand they are somewhat CPU-intensive and take longer to load than the traditional WMs. My own personal preference, which may have nothing to do with yours, is WindowMaker: fast, light, configurable, unobtrusive, stable. GNOME/KDE are generally too big and fussy for me. For complete desktop environments, I've found XFCE4 to be pretty sweet. My _recommendation_ is that you install and try a few WMs. It's trivial to install a WM via aptitude. And you can either run these on their own X session or via Xnest: Xnest :1 1024x768 window-manager-of-choice -display :1 ...etc. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? Information is not power after all: Old-fashioned power is power. If you aren't big industry or government, you have very little power. Once they've hacked the electronic voting system, you'll have no power at all. - Robert X. Cringely signature.asc Description: Digital signature
