Re: Window managers-which one?
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 18:52:12 -0800 Seeker5528 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Currently I am mixing and matching stuff, starting what I want to run from a .xsession file in my home directory. My .xsession file looks like this: # Begin .xsession gnome-settings-daemon gnome-panel #skippy docker -iconsize 64 wmifs -i eth0 wmwave wmifs -i eth2 wmmon wmnetselect -e /usr/bin/firefox -t fbpager -w wallpaper-tray kmix kmixctrl --restore exec fluxbox #End .xsession [...] Now that's what I call eclectic. :-) -- Liam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On (31/10/06 13:19), Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. Well another convert :) openbox is almost as functional but without the extra 'fluff' as you say. It also seems more predictable in terms of behaviour. fluxbox used to do some strange things when trying to 'stick' gkrellm to every workspace. Thanks Clive -- www.clivemenzies.co.uk ... ...strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
* Clive Menzies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. Well another convert :) openbox is almost as functional but without the extra 'fluff' as you say. It also seems more predictable in terms of behaviour. fluxbox used to do some strange things when trying to 'stick' gkrellm to every workspace. I like Openbox a lot, though I wish it had desktop warping, but since using Debian Etch I cannot get it to work right. Any panel I use, so far I have tried fbpanel and pypanel, seems to swallow any windows permanently. If I minimize a window I cannot click on the button and restore it. I tried compiling the apps myself but nothing seemed to change. Oddly, it is being able to use things like pypanel which is what I prefer about Openbox. Patrick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:51:12 + B. Hoffmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My question is which wm to use, as Gnome install metacity by default and I don't have experience with anything else. There's a lot of information on Google Groups and in the Debian archives, however I have a more specific question (bearing in mind this will be used as desktop and ratpoison is not an option). Personally I prefer fluxbox, whether I am using it stand alone, with KDE or with Gnome. Currently I am mixing and matching stuff, starting what I want to run from a .xsession file in my home directory. My .xsession file looks like this: # Begin .xsession gnome-settings-daemon gnome-panel #skippy docker -iconsize 64 wmifs -i eth0 wmwave wmifs -i eth2 wmmon wmnetselect -e /usr/bin/firefox -t fbpager -w wallpaper-tray kmix kmixctrl --restore exec fluxbox #End .xsession Since I am using Gnome panel, visibility of the fluxbox panel is set to false, and using kmix this way you have to edit ~/.kde/share/config/kmixrc setting Visible=false or kmix has this annoying habit of popping up every time you log in instead of waiting until you click it's tray icon. Later, Seeker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Ron Johnson wrote: Get off my lawn, you young whippersnappers! Oh, stop being such a grumpy old man. :-p *Window* manager != *display* manager. Yeah I know, but both have to be... SHINY!!! :-D Best regards, -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Window managers-which one?
On 31 Oct 2006, Douglas Tutty wrote: I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. Doug. Another vote for icewm. I've tried numerous others but always come back to icewm in the end. Anthony -- Anthony Campbell - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microsoft-free zone - Using Linux Gnu-Debian http://www.acampbell.org.uk (blog, book reviews, on-line books and sceptical articles) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/01/06 03:18, George Borisov wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Get off my lawn, you young whippersnappers! Oh, stop being such a grumpy old man. :-p *Window* manager != *display* manager. Yeah I know, but both have to be... SHINY!!! :-D Bah humbug!!! - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is common sense really valid? For example, it is common sense to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that common sense is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFSKQHS9HxQb37XmcRArEIAKDvMKnjXbDcDOGEXkuirkNMErfBNACfVeiA 5d8psPS8YQ+P1k+8CLRM4Vk= =8OAW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Ron Johnson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/01/06 03:18, George Borisov wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Get off my lawn, you young whippersnappers! Oh, stop being such a grumpy old man. :-p *Window* manager != *display* manager. Yeah I know, but both have to be... SHINY!!! :-D Bah humbug!!! In a multi-seat Debian system where there are several videocards/xservers/monitors/keyboards/mice, all of which is now possible in Etch/Sid with just xorg.conf gdm is a must. It shows the logon screen on each monitor and the user just logs on. The startx alternative would be excruciatingly difficult: first going over to the monitor with VT's, logging on as user, giving the right startx command, walking over to the monitor you have chosen, and you leave your vt dangling. H -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
B. Hoffmann wrote: Hi all ! I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Then proceeded to install xfce and synaptic and that's it so far. Don't want any unnecessary fluff this time. My question is which wm to use, as Gnome install metacity by default and I don't have experience with anything else. There's a lot of information on Google Groups and in the Debian archives, however I have a more specific question (bearing in mind this will be used as desktop and ratpoison is not an option). 1. How does sawfish compare in functionality and is it a good option with xfce? 2. Anybody have experience with qvwm? 3. Intending to use Crystal-fvwm later on, will any of these play nice with fvwm too? Must confess I'm still a bit confused as to what exactly a WM does as some seem to have themes available for them which I thought was down to the DE. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? I use fvwm exclusively. PRO: very versatile. CON: 1. I am now wedded to .fvwm2rc 2. I have no idea of the total capability of fvwm. H -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
B. Hoffmann wrote: BTW, Xfce seems to manage windows currently but it's not terribly smooth, it's giving a sort of rolling effect when redrawing, that's why the quest for something better. Yes, I had the same feeling with both Xfce and icewm. That's the reason I stuck with gnome. It works, after all The only issue is file browser in my version of Gnome which is disgusting and xedit which works slw, but I'm used on it. -- Mladen Adamovic http://www.online-utility.org http://www.cheapvps.info http://www.vpsreview.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:55:40 -0800 Marc Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Douglas Tutty wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I like basic functionality, configurability, without bloat; I have been running a 486 for years... I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. I have been using fvwm since I started with linux and Debian about 8 years ago. That was on a 486/33MHz with 12MB of memory. I installed Debian on a 128MB removable disk. I have used KDE on a few occaisions, but I generally prefer a clear, uncluttered screen. I also don't care for all of the extra processes that get started by KDE apps, even when you are not running KDE. One of the main reasons I don't run any kde apps. There are a few nice ones but if you start one up you then need to kill off 7 others manually when you close it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Anthony Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 31 Oct 2006, Douglas Tutty wrote: I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. Doug. Another vote for icewm. I've tried numerous others but always come back to icewm in the end. For someone like me who grew-up with Windows, icewm was a good choice. I didn't want all the bloat in KDE or Gnome and, after some tweaking, icewm has gotten pretty close to my (good or bad) habits from Windows. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Micha Feigin wrote: On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:55:40 -0800 Marc Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Douglas Tutty wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I like basic functionality, configurability, without bloat; I have been running a 486 for years... I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. I have been using fvwm since I started with linux and Debian about 8 years ago. That was on a 486/33MHz with 12MB of memory. I installed Debian on a 128MB removable disk. I have used KDE on a few occaisions, but I generally prefer a clear, uncluttered screen. I also don't care for all of the extra processes that get started by KDE apps, even when you are not running KDE. One of the main reasons I don't run any kde apps. There are a few nice ones but if you start one up you then need to kill off 7 others manually when you close it. Precisely! The last two that I actually used were kcalc and kate. They have been replaced by galculator and SciTE and I am quite happy about it. Nothing left to start up artsd and interfere with my sound, or to startup a million kdeinit processes. Removing libartsc0 did a marvellous job of eliminating kde and its apps from my box. -- Marc Shapiro No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What?! Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here. Boom. Sooner or later ... boom! - Susan Ivanova: B5 - Grail -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On 11/1/06, Marc Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Precisely! The last two that I actually used were kcalc and kate. They have been replaced by galculator and SciTE and I am quite happy about it. Nothing left to start up artsd and interfere with my sound, or to startup a million kdeinit processes. Removing libartsc0 did a marvellous job of eliminating kde and its apps from my box. It seems to me like the KDE processes used to not go away, but now they do. For example, I closed Amarok (only kde app I had running) less that a minute ago and all the kde processes are now gone (without killing them manually). As for arts, yeah, it sucks (waiting for kde 4 and phonon...). My solution was to disable the sound system in the kde control center, and then remove the arts package. I left the libarts packages, because some programs depend on them, but without artsd, libarts can't hurt anything. Of course, if you can manage without any kde apps, that's great, but I need my Amarok, and occasionally kword, kivio, krita, ksnapshot and konq. Cheers, Kelly -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Wednesday 01 November 2006 10:53 am, Andrei Popescu wrote: For someone like me who grew-up with Windows, icewm was a good choice. I didn't want all the bloat in KDE or Gnome and, after some tweaking, icewm has gotten pretty close to my (good or bad) habits from Windows. I use KDE or wmaker. -- Paganism is populated almost entirely by white middle class academia ... A whopping 75 percent of them participate in grindingly boring interpretations of deviant sexuality. - alliekatt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Then proceeded to install xfce and synaptic and that's it so far. Don't want any unnecessary fluff this time. My question is which wm to use, as Gnome install metacity by default and I don't have experience with anything else. There's a lot of information on Google Groups and in the Debian archives, however I have a more specific question (bearing in mind this will be used as desktop and ratpoison is not an option). 1. How does sawfish compare in functionality and is it a good option with xfce? 2. Anybody have experience with qvwm? 3. Intending to use Crystal-fvwm later on, will any of these play nice with fvwm too? Must confess I'm still a bit confused as to what exactly a WM does as some seem to have themes available for them which I thought was down to the DE. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? Apologies for bringing this up again! Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. 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: Window managers-which one?
B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Then proceeded to install xfce and synaptic and that's it so far. Don't want any unnecessary fluff this time. Not sure why you need Gnome in the first place. If you are happy with Xfce (do you mean Xfce4?) then you can just do (after installing the base system and Xserver): aptitude install xfce4 If you want even less bloat then you can install Xfce4 components individually (takes a bit more effort). You will also need a display manager (unless you like the whole startx thing). xdm - small and simple and can look nice with a bit of effort wdm - small and simple but ugly :-( gdm - pretty and simple but not small and depends on lots of Gnome libraries kdm - probably pretty as well (don't use it) but depends on pretty much the entire of KDE. I personally use gdm, but I used wdm before (before getting too depressed about how ugly it is.) Best regards, -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Window managers-which one?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/31/06 09:24, George Borisov wrote: B. Hoffmann wrote: [snip] You will also need a display manager (unless you like the whole startx thing). Grouchy Geek says, Since you can start X with startx, by definition, you do *not need* a display manager. xdm - small and simple and can look nice with a bit of effort wdm - small and simple but ugly :-( gdm - pretty and simple but not small and depends on lots of Gnome libraries kdm - probably pretty as well (don't use it) but depends on pretty much the entire of KDE. I personally use gdm, but I used wdm before (before getting too depressed about how ugly it is.) Why waste RAM on something you have *no* need for and doesn't *do* anything that the console does just as well? - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is common sense really valid? For example, it is common sense to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that common sense is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFR31fS9HxQb37XmcRArEjAJ41Ieym0ZX9YT585gGzfSU6o0MTKwCgwyib rd2zm3H1Lhw1zutg+N65tUc= =vD8w -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
B. Hoffmann: Must confess I'm still a bit confused as to what exactly a WM does as some seem to have themes available for them which I thought was down to the DE. Yes and No. A WM is supposed to, well, manage windows (or give the user the chance to do it). Typically this includes: * place windows somewhere on the desktop (may be interactive) * decorate windows with titlebars, borders, action buttons (minimize, maximize, close etc.). Of course the window decoration (not the content!) may be themed. * draw a taskbar somewhere on the desktop * some sort of desktop decoration (background image, icons etc.) While everything except the first job is purely optional, most WMs do other things, too. They provide virtual desktops, have some kinde of start menu, show time date etc. Desktop environments do all this, too, but they try to integrate the work of several programs. Sometimes this is done in a way that makes every single program more useful if it is running together with the other ones. Gnome, for example, has (at least) three important programs running, which interact with the user: * Metacity, the WM (Very, very basic. Draws window borders and positions windows in a widely accepted, but IMO braindead manner.) * gnome-panel, draws the bars at the top and bottom of the default desktop and uses other programs (applets) to show something useful (menu, taskbar, date time, systray, $younameit). * nautilus, the file manager, which is also responsible for drawing desktop icons. (A design decision apparently adopted from Windows, but Maybe Apple does this, too. Either way, I don't understand it.) What's so nice about this is that things like Drag'n'Drop from the (nautilus-managed) desktop to a gnome-panel work. And you can alter the look and feel in one central place for all (DE-aware) applications. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? While I am not completely sure about fvwm, as I have never used it, IceWM is definitely not a DE but a WM. It does have far more features than a WM strictly needs (themes, start menu, battery, CPU network monitor, clock, intelligent window placement, tons of configuration options) but it does not interact with other programs in any special way. It is pretty self-contained. And it doesn't care if you start another program to manage the desktop (icons, background image) or use a different program to display a taskbar. By the way, you can use IceWM when running Gnome (replacing Metacity). If you are searching for a lightweight WM and are not afraid to tweak text files (only key=value kind of syntax), I can only recommend giving IceWM a try. I use it since my first days with Linux and still love it. It's just not as shiny as a Gnome or Xfce4 desktop (but close). J. -- Fashion is more important to me than war, famine, disease or art. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Window managers-which one?
On 10/31/06, Jeronimo Pellegrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. I was a long time fluxbox user, but I didn't really like the task bar. I'd rather use something like WindowMaker, which manages windows more like a Mac. I used WindowMaker for a while, but it didn't work well with all programs. I finally found Enlightenment (pun intended). It's very stable and has just enough fluff, in the form of user feedback, so that it has a more solid feel than Fluxbox. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. J. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Jeronimo Pellegrini escribe: I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. Count another vote for openbox, it's damn light and damn beautiful and turns a 486 into a ready for internet box. Cordially, Ismael -- Ismael Valladolid Torres Il est vain de pleurer sur l'esprit, il suffit de travailler pour lui. Albert Camus http://digitrazos.info/ http://lamediahostia.blogspot.com/OpenPGP key ID: 0xDE721AF4 http://www.hispasonic.com/foro73.html Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpUxn9eKqfdn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:44AM -0800, Jason Dunsmore wrote: On 10/31/06, Jeronimo Pellegrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. I was a long time fluxbox user, but I didn't really like the task bar. Yes! Neither did I. And my openbox doesn't show one (it's optional). :-) I'd rather use something like WindowMaker, which manages windows more like a Mac. I used WindowMaker for a while, but it didn't work well with all programs. I finally found Enlightenment (pun intended). It's very stable and has just enough fluff, in the form of user feedback, so that it has a more solid feel than Fluxbox. I've found Enlightenment too bloated... But that's a matter of taste, so... :-) J. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Ron Johnson wrote: I personally use gdm, but I used wdm before (before getting too depressed about how ugly it is.) Why waste RAM on something you have *no* need for and doesn't *do* anything that the console does just as well? Because I like shiny. Shiny == good. Anyway, I have the RAM to spare, so... SHINY!!! If it makes you feel better, the main reason I use a window manager is so that I can have lots of consoles open at the same time (what else would you use this GUI thing for?) ;-) Best regards, -- George Borisov DXSolutions Ltd signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Window managers-which one?
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I like basic functionality, configurability, without bloat; I have been running a 486 for years... I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
On (31/10/06 13:19), Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I went pretty much the same way, but then one day I thought fluxbox was kind of slow to draw menus etc... And I found openbox! It's fast, looks just like fluxbox, except that it doesn't have the extra fluff. :-) You may want to give it a try. Not one I've tried... so yes I'll give it a whirl :) 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: Window managers-which one?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/31/06 11:39, George Borisov wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: I personally use gdm, but I used wdm before (before getting too depressed about how ugly it is.) Why waste RAM on something you have *no* need for and doesn't *do* anything that the console does just as well? Because I like shiny. Shiny == good. Anyway, I have the RAM to spare, so... SHINY!!! Get off my lawn, you young whippersnappers! If it makes you feel better, the main reason I use a window manager is so that I can have lots of consoles open at the same time (what else would you use this GUI thing for?) ;-) You will also need a display manager *Window* manager != *display* manager. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is common sense really valid? For example, it is common sense to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that common sense is obviously wrong. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFR6UnS9HxQb37XmcRAsdHAJ9DP2FZFY3qFC1Z6gT/uCyW8NzEWQCgzjFD khu9j7xjO4LY/8UvpsgkF+Q= =huLZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Douglas Tutty wrote: On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +, Clive Menzies wrote: On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote: I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before always going with the default install with Gnome. Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and DE's? Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox. I'm very happy now but guess I may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty functional. I like basic functionality, configurability, without bloat; I have been running a 486 for years... I use icewm. It does everything I want without the struggle of adding features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage. It must be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486. I have been using fvwm since I started with linux and Debian about 8 years ago. That was on a 486/33MHz with 12MB of memory. I installed Debian on a 128MB removable disk. I have used KDE on a few occaisions, but I generally prefer a clear, uncluttered screen. I also don't care for all of the extra processes that get started by KDE apps, even when you are not running KDE. -- Marc Shapiro No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What?! Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here. Boom. Sooner or later ... boom! - Susan Ivanova: B5 - Grail -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window managers-which one?
Thank you for all the replies and good explanations, and a bit of a laugh. Jochen Schulz wrote: Yes and No. A WM is supposed to, well, manage windows (or give the user the chance to do it). Typically this includes: * place windows somewhere on the desktop (may be interactive) * decorate windows with titlebars, borders, action buttons (minimize, maximize, close etc.). Of course the window decoration (not the content!) may be themed. Jochen: Does this mean that the Themes in Gnome for window frames (Crux etc.) are really metacity themes and were not available if metacity was not installed? George Borisov wrote: Not sure why you need Gnome in the first place. If you are happy with Xfce (do you mean Xfce4?) then you can just do (after installing the base system and Xserver): Yes I mean Xfce4. Xfce for me is now just a faster better Gnome. It's getting amazingly full featured and with Zenwalk and Vector standard and some other distros showcasing it it really shines. I liked Gnome and most of its apps a lot but lately found it rather slow. The journey just started, probably will end up with only something like blackbox like you guys one day. If you want even less bloat then you can install Xfce4 components individually (takes a bit more effort). Nice to end up with only what you want and nothing more. Got fluxbox on a small DSL partition but for now it's Xfce on the main desktop. Plus - how do you get icons to display on your fluxbox work space? What about Sawfish? -- Kind Regards, B. Hoffmann
Re: Window managers-which one?
Plus - how do you get icons to display on your fluxbox work space? Install the program idesk. In your startup file, at /home/user/.fluxbox/startup, add idesk (without quotes). Start fluxbox and you'll see a home icon. If my memory serves me correctly, I think it's pretty easy to create other icons. Files managing the icons are in the /home/user/.idesktop directory. Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:34:24PM +0100, Keith O'Connell wrote: Hi, There was a thread in this list last week where people were asked if the preferred KDE or Gnome, and the majority of people who posted a reply basicaly said neither. They all said they went with a window manager and no desktop and their machines were the better for it. I have used Gnome for quite a while now, but this thread made me wonder why I do, and I cannot think of a good reason. I have been googling for a few days now looking for an account of just how much a performance hit Gnome or KDE are and what the respective speed and comparative performances are for the various window managers. I thought I would be awash with articles, but I cannot find anything that compares the options. Can someone tell me where I can find anything on this subject I would take a look at http://www.xwinman.org and check out your options. I find XFce4 (http://www.xfce.org) and VTWM suit my needs fine. They run very well on all the machines that I regularly work on, which range from a 133MHz 486 with 32MB of RAM all the way through 2GHz P-4s with 512MB of RAM. -- -- Skylar Thompson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~skylar/ pgpUy64sJprZN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Window Managers
welly hartanto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: when gnome's suck go to kde, when kde being broken go to xfce.that's the cycle of life ;-) Basically, what I do too. But I change more because the one I'm currently using annoys me too much. -- 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: Window Managers
Keith O'Connell wrote: Hi, There was a thread in this list last week where people were asked if the preferred KDE or Gnome, and the majority of people who posted a reply basicaly said neither. They all said they went with a window manager and no desktop and their machines were the better for it. I have used Gnome for quite a while now, but this thread made me wonder why I do, and I cannot think of a good reason. I have been googling for a few days now looking for an account of just how much a performance hit Gnome or KDE are and what the respective speed and comparative performances are for the various window managers. I thought I would be awash with articles, but I cannot find anything that compares the options. Can someone tell me where I can find anything on this subject Keith. Hello Keith, You don't have to stay with the rigid 'either/or' of KDE/Gnome, either. Do you really use every application in which ever one you are using? I removed all of Open Office and KDE. I then installed just the Gnome applications I was interested in using. In my case, that was gACC, gnumeric, gnucash and abiword-gnome, with their associated plugins and docs. I also installed Lyx, which I might be uninstalling yet in favour of Groff, once I have checked it out. The best way I found to clean things up was to remove the package 'yelp', and to install 'firestarter.' These two removed anything unnecessary in Gnome, and Firestarter installed the dependencies that made it stable. There's no need to weigh the situation down with a whole lot of Gnome GUI real estate. I installed Openbox, fluxbox, for window managers, and xfce4 for an environment, and once I have made up my mind what I want to keep out of that, some of that'll go too. There are filemanagers that are more efficient than nautilus. I use emelfm and mc. But I intend to check out gentoo more thoroughly. If I need to listen to some music while I'm working, applications the like of xfreecd sound just as good as the full blown Gnome media setup. Besides the saved hard disc space, the performance is obvious. I regret I don't have measurements. Regards, David. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:34:24 +0100, Keith O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have used Gnome for quite a while now, but this thread made me wonder why I do, and I cannot think of a good reason. I have been googling for a few days now looking for an account of just how much a performance hit Gnome or KDE are and what the respective speed and comparative performances are for the various window managers. Just remember that if you are using less than 100% of your resources, then you have paid for something you are not using. Filling up memory is not the problem: its the swapping in and out of tasks which have and have not been used etc. which cause the performance penalties. As more intelligent VM and scheduling algorithms are divised, we'll see less and less of a problem. Right now with a bit of understanding of what you use and when etc. you can maintain a high load and still have responsive computing. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
--- Katipo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith O'Connell wrote: Hi, There was a thread in this list last week where people were asked if the preferred KDE or Gnome, and the majority of people who posted a reply basicaly said neither. They all said they went with a window manager and no desktop and their machines were the better for it. I have used Gnome for quite a while now, but this thread made me wonder why I do, and I cannot think of a good reason. I have been googling for a few days now looking for an account of just how much a performance hit Gnome or KDE are and what the respective speed and comparative performances are for the various window managers. I thought I would be awash with articles, but I cannot find anything that compares the options. Can someone tell me where I can find anything on this subject Keith. well...if you got a bunch of space in your disk and have no idea for what it is and you got pretty good harddware constructed your box, you'll be like me. Got latest gnome, kde, xfce, windowmaker, enlightement, etc. It's maybe fool to waste diskspace for this thing i do. in case, i do it for fun without no further thought for performance since it never bring me any trouble at all. when gnome's suck go to kde, when kde being broken go to xfce.that's the cycle of life ;-) Even if I should choose, i'd rather choose gnome for sure with no argument at all... :D anyway, it's good to have a clear comparasion in 'plus' and 'minus' of those desktop environment since users can choose which one is suitable for their need. happy compare, welly __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
on Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 08:33:31PM +, Dave Thorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). windowmaker does this too. Ctrl-(double-clicking) on the titlebar maximises vertically, shift-(double-clicking) maximises horizonally, ctrl-shift-(double-clicking) maximises both directions. Simply double-clicking shades the window. You can also bind this to a key. altspace toggles maximize vertical on my boxes. I'm utterly frustrated on any system that doesn't have this, naturally Peace. -- Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? Bush/Cheney '04: Compassionate Colonialism signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On 08 Feb 2004, Philipp Weis wrote: On 08 Feb 2004, Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Sawfish can maximize vertically, horizontally and in both directions. It was the default window manager with gnome 1 and will probably work well together with gnome 2. Icewm does this: Shift-Alt-F10 out of the box, or you could assign your own key combination. Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk using Linux GNU/Debian || for book reviews, electronic Windows-free zone || books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
Johann Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:42:17 -0500: On Sunday February 8 at 11:34am Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. FVWM. Whatever bindings you set up. I don't use gnome, so no idea, although I did notice a few seconds ago that some worthless peice of crap in gnome changed my background - how are you meant to change font sizes in gtk apps without using that silly gnome-control-panel? -- TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/ GNU/Happy 50th birthday RMS! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 06:55:39PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote: I don't use gnome, so no idea, although I did notice a few seconds ago that some worthless peice of crap in gnome changed my background - how are you meant to change font sizes in gtk apps without using that silly gnome-control-panel? You're not. Annoying, isn't it? Yet another reason to stay far far away from the God-King's creation. I'm sure there's an essay somewhere that says you don't need to change the font. Put what you want in your ~/.gtkrc and/or ~/.gtkrc-2.0 and forget about it. The gtk-theme-switch package can automate this for you. -- Marc Wilson | Superstition, idolatry, and hypocrisy have ample [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wages, but truth goes a-begging. -- Martin Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Btw, I'm using metacity right now, but I don't see any such option. Metacity does, but only with a keybinding. You need to set a keyboard shortcut for Maximize window vertically. Applications Desktop Pref. Keyboard Shortcuts -- Cheers, Sven Arvidsson sa at whiz.se http://www.whiz.se -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sunday February 8 at 09:06pm Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 10:42:17PM -0500, Johann Koenig wrote: Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. Have not used with Gnome, so I can't comment. Enlightenment v17 CVS will, as it supports EWMH. You can forget about E v16. Does your DR17 install co-exist nicely with DR16? I'm considering trying it out, but would like to ensure that my current setup doesn't get b0rked by DR17. On a slightly related topic: is there an unofficial Debian package for DR17, or are you just using the CVS and doing the standard source build/install? -- -johann koenig Today is Sweetmorn, the 36th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3170 My public pgp key: http://mental-graffiti.com/pgp/johannkoenig.pgp pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
Marc Wilson wrote: On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 10:42:17PM -0500, Johann Koenig wrote: Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. Have not used with Gnome, so I can't comment. Enlightenment v17 CVS will, as it supports EWMH. You can forget about E v16. Enlightenment v16 works fine for me with Gnome, though I probably don't use all the features of Gnome. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 09:49:13AM -0500, Johann Koenig wrote: On Sunday February 8 at 09:06pm Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Enlightenment v17 CVS will, as it supports EWMH. You can forget about E v16. Does your DR17 install co-exist nicely with DR16? Not mine... I stopped using Enlightenment years ago. I imagine it would if you built it yourself. The only window manager(s) I use are openbox and blackbox. -- Marc Wilson | Oh, I am a C programmer and I'm okay I muck with [EMAIL PROTECTED] | indices and structs all day And when it works, | I shout hoo-ray Oh, I am a C programmer and I'm okay signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
Tim Connors wrote: Johann Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:42:17 -0500: On Sunday February 8 at 11:34am Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. FVWM. Whatever bindings you set up. yep, IIRC the default debian bindings are left click vertical, middle click both, right click horizontal (click on the maximize button on the right side of the title). it can also be set up to maximize to certain percentage (and you can set different key and/or mouse bindings) erik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 01:38:26AM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 06:55:39PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote: I don't use gnome, so no idea, although I did notice a few seconds ago that some worthless peice of crap in gnome changed my background - how are you meant to change font sizes in gtk apps without using that silly gnome-control-panel? You're not. Annoying, isn't it? Yet another reason to stay far far away from the God-King's creation. I'm sure there's an essay somewhere that says you don't need to change the font. Also unless its changed some of the gnome packages need the settings daemon to run in the background. Was really frustrating with evolution trying to set the font until I realized I needed to start the daemons. It was dumped out with the water at some point in favor of mutt. Put what you want in your ~/.gtkrc and/or ~/.gtkrc-2.0 and forget about it. The gtk-theme-switch package can automate this for you. -- Marc Wilson | Superstition, idolatry, and hypocrisy have ample [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wages, but truth goes a-begging. -- Martin Luther -- 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: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On 08 Feb 2004, Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Sawfish can maximize vertically, horizontally and in both directions. It was the default window manager with gnome 1 and will probably work well together with gnome 2. -- Philipp Weis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freiburg, Germany http://pweis.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Openbox 3 does. !-- Window operations -- keyboard keybind key=Mod4-w keybind key=m action name=ToggleMaximizeFull/ /keybind keybind key=v action name=ToggleMaximizeVert/ /keybind keybind key=h action name=ToggleMaximizeHorz/ /keybind /keybind /keyboard or, if you like the mouse: !-- Mouse operations -- mouse context name=maximize mousebind button=Left action=press action name=Focus/ /mousebind mousebind button=Middle action=press action name=Focus/ /mousebind mousebind button=Right action=press action name=Focus/ /mousebind mousebind button=Left action=click action name=ToggleMaximizeFull/ /mousebind mousebind button=Middle action=click action name=ToggleMaximizeVert/ /mousebind mousebind button=Right action=click action name=ToggleMaximizeHorz/ /mousebind /context /mouse -- Marc Wilson | History repeats itself -- the first time as a [EMAIL PROTECTED] | tragi-comedy, the second time as bedroom farce. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On 2004-02-08, Monique Y. Herman penned: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Btw, I'm using metacity right now, but I don't see any such option. -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On 2004-02-08, Philipp Weis penned: On 08 Feb 2004, Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Sawfish can maximize vertically, horizontally and in both directions. It was the default window manager with gnome 1 and will probably work well together with gnome 2. Sure enough! I installed sawfish; middle-click on the maximize button seems to do the trick. There are probably other things I should care about in a window manager, but this is my killer feature. Thank you very much! -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). windowmaker does this too. Ctrl-(double-clicking) on the titlebar maximises vertically, shift-(double-clicking) maximises horizonally, ctrl-shift-(double-clicking) maximises both directions. Simply double-clicking shades the window. Of course, this could all be configurable and different where you are. Cheers, -- dave thorn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sun, 8 Feb 2004 11:59:36 -0700 Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2004-02-08, Monique Y. Herman penned: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Btw, I'm using metacity right now, but I don't see any such option. Not sure about gnome ones but both kwin and xfwm4 have all 3 possibilities (vertical, horizontal and full). James -- James Tappin, O__ I forget the punishment for using [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- \/`Microsoft --- Something lingering http://www.tappin.me.uk/with data loss in it I fancy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sunday February 8 at 11:34am Monique Y. Herman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). Anyone using a window manager right now that does this? Preferably one that interacts well with gnome. Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. Have not used with Gnome, so I can't comment. -- -johann koenig Today is Sweetmorn, the 36th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3170 My public pgp key: http://mental-graffiti.com/pgp/johannkoenig.pgp pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 10:42:17PM -0500, Johann Koenig wrote: Enlightenment. Right click to maximize vertically, middle click to maximize horizontally. Have not used with Gnome, so I can't comment. Enlightenment v17 CVS will, as it supports EWMH. You can forget about E v16. -- Marc Wilson | There are two ways of disliking poetry; one way [EMAIL PROTECTED] | is to dislike it, the other is to read Pope. -- | Oscar Wilde signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: window managers with maximize-vertical?
Dave Thorn wrote: On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 11:34:32AM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: It seems to me that, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, I had a window manager that supported maximize-vertical (as opposed to maximizing in both directions). windowmaker does this too. Ctrl-(double-clicking) on the titlebar maximises vertically, shift-(double-clicking) maximises horizonally, ctrl-shift-(double-clicking) maximises both directions. Simply double-clicking shades the window. Man, you're teh r0xx0r. I was following this thread and at the same time thinking It would be so neat WindowMaker had this feature... but I don't think so, pity me Thanks! :-) -- Cristian Gutierrez http://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~crgutier [EMAIL PROTECTED]Jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] «UNIX is like Sex: If you don't know it, you don't miss it. But if you know it, you'll need it.» -- Anonymous. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Tu peux envisager Window Maker aussi. Je l'utilise sur un K6 233 avec 160 Mo de Ram. Par contre, sur ce K6 j'utilise Mozilla 1.5 qui a des lenteurs très pénibles il faudra envisager un autre navigateur. Quant à OOo, je l'ai installé une fois, je l'ai lancé et j'ai eu le temps de me faire un café avant qu'il ait démarré... sur un P166/64Mo je te souhaite beaucoup de patience. Antoine
Re: Window Managers
Citation de Soubie Sébastien : Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Merci Bonjour, Je te conseil IceWM ou Fluxbox, qui est un peu plus dur à utiliser au début. Comme navigateur, Mozilla-Firebird ou alors même Dillo qui est TRÈS light mais peut suffire pour afficher des pages simples. Openoffice va ramer a mort évidemment, il faudrait essayer Abiword (la dernière version est enfin stable). Max pgp3IBFKhoXXM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Window Managers
Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Je l'utilise sur ma machine depuis 7 mois. Avantages: -Très léger. -Hyper-configurable. -Se configure aisément, soit avec les fichiers de config plutôt clairs, soit avec un utilitaire graphique. Inconvénient: -Pas très beau, même avec des thèmes. Cédric
Re: Window Managers
Le lundi 17 novembre 2003, Soubie Sébastien a écrit... bonjour, Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur Pour WMaker, PII, 512 Mo Ram %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND 0.1 0.6 6384 3412 ?SNov11 9:03 /usr/local/bin/wmaker -- jean-michel
Re: Window Managers
* Soubie Sébastien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-11-17 08:59] : Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Très bien pour ce genre de configuration, je l'utilisais à un moment sur un PPro 200 sans aucun problème. Le problème viendra plus pour faire fonctionner OpenOffice (raisonnablement) sur ce genre de configuration. Assez configurable (principalement en éditant les fichiers de config à la main) et très facile à prendre en main (les raccourcis clavier par défaut sont AMA assez intuitifs). Sinon, un comparatif sur les WM est disponible à http://lmsoft.free.fr/linux/menu.php3?page=wm (mais je suis un peu sceptique sur les 15s de chargement de IceWM). Fred -- Comment poser les questions de manière intelligente ? http://www.gnurou.org/documents/smart-questions-fr.html Code de conduite des listes Debian http://www.fr.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Re: Window Managers
Le Lundi 17 Novembre 2003 08:59, Soubie Sébastien a écrit : Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Fluxbox. Ooo ça vas être juste. abiword peut-être. -- Frédéric Zulian f1sxo
Re: Window Managers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 FVWM2 ou Fluxbox suivant les préférences me semblent être de bons choix en matière de légèreté. WindowMaker également. Abiword 2 sera très bien en tant que traitement de texte. Les filtres d'import/export sont assez bons et il gère les tableaux maintenant :) Openoffice ça sera difficile par contre :( Le Lundi 17 Novembre 2003 11:19, zulian a écrit : Le Lundi 17 Novembre 2003 08:59, Soubie Sébastien a écrit : Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Fluxbox. Ooo ça vas être juste. abiword peut-être. -- Frédéric Zulian f1sxo - -- There are only 10 types of people in the world : Those who understand binary, and those who don't -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/uKZr+BiZrfjl3RgRAiZcAJ9XeSajf1QfrxVKg9r8Waa+uoQ6LACgi/zc rQEm1CQF69gqCIyJoWMPC8M= =oLmJ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Window Managers
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 09:10:41AM +0100, Jean-Michel OLTRA wrote: Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur Pour WMaker, PII, 512 Mo Ram %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND 0.1 0.6 6384 3412 ?SNov11 9:03 /usr/local/bin/wmaker Donc, en trois fois plus petit: yves 512 0.0 0.1 2708 788 pts/0SNov13 0:00 ion ion propose une interface révolutionnaire qui accroit réellement la productivité (sisi). Pour un browser, bonne chance, je suis toujours à la recherche pour un Pentium 100/40Mb de RAM, et le résultat est qu'aucun browser conventionnel ne marche correctement. Je conseille: - w3mmee-img, une extension de w3m qui affiche les images dans un xterm(!), très pratique. - links, en le recompilant pour avoir l'option -g et donc l'affichage graphique (ne surtout pas utiliser le paquet Debian, qui présente une version de links emasculée pour la ramener au niveau de lynx). Bon courage, /Y
Re: Window Managers
* Yves Rutschle [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-11-17 11:09] : On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 09:10:41AM +0100, Jean-Michel OLTRA wrote: [...] B Pour un browser, bonne chance, je suis toujours à la recherche pour un Pentium 100/40Mb de RAM, et le résultat est qu'aucun browser conventionnel ne marche correctement. Je conseille: - w3mmee-img, une extension de w3m qui affiche les images dans un xterm(!), très pratique. - links, en le recompilant pour avoir l'option -g et donc l'affichage graphique (ne surtout pas utiliser le paquet Debian, qui présente une version de links emasculée pour la ramener au niveau de lynx). Dillo ? Fred -- Comment poser les questions de manière intelligente ? http://www.gnurou.org/documents/smart-questions-fr.html Code de conduite des listes Debian http://www.fr.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Re: Window Managers
Yves Rutschle a écrit : On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 09:10:41AM +0100, Jean-Michel OLTRA wrote: Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur Pour WMaker, PII, 512 Mo Ram %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND 0.1 0.6 6384 3412 ?SNov11 9:03 /usr/local/bin/wmaker Donc, en trois fois plus petit: yves 512 0.0 0.1 2708 788 pts/0SNov13 0:00 ion ion propose une interface révolutionnaire qui accroit réellement la productivité (sisi). Pour un browser, bonne chance, je suis toujours à la recherche pour un Pentium 100/40Mb de RAM, et le résultat est qu'aucun browser conventionnel ne marche correctement. Je conseille: - w3mmee-img, une extension de w3m qui affiche les images dans un xterm(!), très pratique. - links, en le recompilant pour avoir l'option -g et donc l'affichage graphique (ne surtout pas utiliser le paquet Debian, qui présente une version de links emasculée pour la ramener au niveau de lynx). Bon courage, /Y ion m'interesse mais j'ai installé une woody pour le moment et apparement ion se trouve sur la version unstable. Que dois-je mettre dans mon sources-list pour accéder au fichier de la version testing et unstable?
Re: Window Managers
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 01:22:00PM +0100, Soubie Sébastien wrote: ion m'interesse mais j'ai installé une woody pour le moment et apparement ion se trouve sur la version unstable. Ça m'étonnerait, je l'utilise sur 3 stables...: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:yves$ apt-cache policy ion ion: Installed: 0.0.20020207-1 Candidate: 0.0.20020207-1 Version Table: 0.0.20020207-5 0 500 ftp://ftp.uk.debian.org testing/main Packages *** 0.0.20020207-1 0 990 ftp://ftp.uk.debian.org stable/main Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status /Y
Re: Window Managers
Le lun 17/11/2003 à 08:59, Soubie Sébastien a écrit : Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. J'ai voulu faire la même chose et j'ai laissé tomber. J'ai tenté de mettre carrémetn OOo en window manager : ça marche mais c'est pas top (pas de bordures aux fenêtres ni de possibilité de les déplacer). Avec window maker, j'ai pu lancer OOo mais rien que créer un nouveau document a du prendre une ou deux minutes tellement ça swappait (32Mo seulement sur la machine que j'avais, peut-être qu'avec 64...) Sinon comme window manager super-light, il y a blackbox et golem (dérivé light de window maker). Ce dernier ne doit pas encore être dans la debian standard mais quelqu'un de la liste avait fait un .deb (que j'ai installé et utilisé). Régis.
Re: Window Managers
FluxBox c'est le mieux a mon avis, je l'utilise sur un openbrick avec 256Mo de SDRAM(un luxe) et une debian sur une Compact Flash 128Mo mais on peu faire moins, ou plus... Georges Soubie Sébastien wrote: Bonjour tout le monde, Afin d'habiller des petit PC (Pentium 166 mmx 64Mo de Ram), je cherche une interface graphique légère et fonctionnelle permettant par exemple de faire fonctionner une suite comme Openoffice et un navigateur internet. Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur J'ai pensé à IceWm mais je n'ai pas trouvé de comparatif entre les différent window manager sur le net. Que pensez-vous de IceWm? Merci
Re: Window Managers
Georges Roux [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: FluxBox c'est le mieux a mon avis, je l'utilise sur un openbrick avec 256Mo de SDRAM(un luxe) et une debian sur une Compact Flash 128Mo mais on peu faire moins, ou plus... bon je voudrais pas encore une fois relancer un debat sur les windows manager, mais bon pour une petite machine = sawfish je l'utilse sur mon PII 200Mhz, 64RAM sans aucun pb Georges -- (concatenate 'string lam (reverse gro.ylimafxut@))
Re: Window Managers
Le lun 17/11/2003 à 09:10, Jean-Michel OLTRA a écrit : Le lundi 17 novembre 2003, Soubie Sébastien a écrit... bonjour, Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur Pour WMaker, PII, 512 Mo Ram %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND 0.1 0.6 6384 3412 ?SNov11 9:03 /usr/local/bin/wmaker -- jean-michel Avec la commande gmemusage : WindowMaker : 1444k ps aux | grep windowmaker : USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND user 852 0.0 0.6 7076 3192 ? S17:12 0:00 /usr/bin/WindowMaker
Re: Window Managers
Oui Fluxbox seulement 28% de moins que WindowMaker Fluxbox 1120k ps aux | grep fluxbox georges 1034 0.0 1.0 4988 2540 ?S15:26 0:03 /usr/bin/fluxbox Georges LudO wrote: Le lun 17/11/2003 à 09:10, Jean-Michel OLTRA a écrit : Le lundi 17 novembre 2003, Soubie Sébastien a écrit... bonjour, Voilou, si vous avez quelques idées, je suis preneur Pour WMaker, PII, 512 Mo Ram %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND 0.1 0.6 6384 3412 ?SNov11 9:03 /usr/local/bin/wmaker -- jean-michel Avec la commande gmemusage : WindowMaker : 1444k ps aux | grep windowmaker : USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND user 852 0.0 0.6 7076 3192 ? S17:12 0:00 /usr/bin/WindowMaker
Re: Window Managers (fluxbox)
slt, A propos de fluxbox (que je trouve être un bon choix aussi, testé sur un P120 16M), depuis le dernier upgrade le format de la date que j'ai spécifié dans ~/fluxbox/init n'est plus pris en compte... session.screen0.strftimeFormat: %H:%M %A %d %B Des tuyaux ? -- William - http://flibuste.net
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 09:01:42AM +, Karsten M. Self wrote: on Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. No not there. ~/.xsession :-) None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? Systemwide: # update-alternatives --config x-window-manager I wish it is as simple. Since x-session-manager has priority over x-window-manager, nothing really happens for the window manager. x-session-manager loads its window manager (sawmill ...). Anyway, Branden was going to review this mess of window/session manager initialization soon. Anyway, it is non-trivial configuration to understand. So many random codes by different packages :-( I was and I am still confused. For your own use, make the following the last line of ~/.xsession exec afterstep ...and take a look at WindowMaker if you like Afterstep. Yeh, ~/.xsession is the key on Debian. Also one of the following are interesting. exec wmaker # install wmaker, nice and clean exec blackbox# install blackbox, very slick and light exec fluxbox # install fluxbox, blackbox + nice tab thing exec fcwm# install xfce, Mac OS-X like exec icewm # install icewm,Light windows like -- ~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ + Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cupertino CA USA, GPG-key: A8061F32 .''`. Debian Reference: post-installation user's guide for non-developers : :' : http://qref.sf.net and http://people.debian.org/~osamu `. `' Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software --- Social Contract -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
Hi Osamu, I recommend one package that detects all installed Window managers, and allows the user to select which one to start, or click a checkbox that updates an /etc/wmconfig file to make that window manager the default. And also it should have a hot key so that if you press F12 for example in an emergency the whole Window system can be brought down and you can login at a command prompt instead of that annoying wdm login thing. This is awful when someone gets their X setup wrong and the screen goes mad, the mouse goes nuts and you can't login because nothing works and you need a command prompt to get back into XFree86Setup! PLEASE add the hot-key to kill off the graphical login to get a good ol' command line back! This feature is missing as far as I know and it should be showed in big letters on wdm - To kill wdm and get a shell, hit F-whatever. Thanks ! Your email was very helpful. Now I know why .xinitrc didn't work but .xsession did! By the way, what does a programmer need to learn to develop a new window manager, do you know? (Read the source code for a simple WM, because there is nothing else?) Kind Regards, James - Original Message - From: Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: James Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 8:44 PM Subject: Re: Window Managers On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 09:01:42AM +, Karsten M. Self wrote: on Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. No not there. ~/.xsession :-) None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? Systemwide: # update-alternatives --config x-window-manager I wish it is as simple. Since x-session-manager has priority over x-window-manager, nothing really happens for the window manager. x-session-manager loads its window manager (sawmill ...). Anyway, Branden was going to review this mess of window/session manager initialization soon. Anyway, it is non-trivial configuration to understand. So many random codes by different packages :-( I was and I am still confused. For your own use, make the following the last line of ~/.xsession exec afterstep ...and take a look at WindowMaker if you like Afterstep. Yeh, ~/.xsession is the key on Debian. Also one of the following are interesting. exec wmaker # install wmaker, nice and clean exec blackbox# install blackbox, very slick and light exec fluxbox # install fluxbox, blackbox + nice tab thing exec fcwm# install xfce, Mac OS-X like exec icewm # install icewm,Light windows like -- ~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ + Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cupertino CA USA, GPG-key: A8061F32 .''`. Debian Reference: post-installation user's guide for non-developers : :' : http://qref.sf.net and http://people.debian.org/~osamu `. `' Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software --- Social Contract -- 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: Window Managers
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 23:41:39 +1100 James Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: also it should have a hot key so that if you press F12 for example in an emergency the whole Window system can be brought down and you can login at a command prompt instead of that annoying wdm login thing. This is awful when someone gets their X setup wrong and the screen goes mad, the mouse goes nuts and you can't login because nothing works and you need a command prompt to get back into XFree86Setup! Ctrl-Alt-F1 = Goto virtual console #1 (etc up to F7 which is usually X) Ctrl-Alt-Backspace = Kill the X-server -- James Tappin, O__ I forget the punishment for using [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- \/`Microsoft --- Something lingering http://www.tappin.me.uk/with data loss in it I fancy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
on Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? Systemwide: # update-alternatives --config x-window-manager For your own use, make the following the last line of ~/.xsession exec afterstep ...and take a look at WindowMaker if you like Afterstep. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? Geek for hire: http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? put the window manager you would like to start with [afterstep?] in your .xession file. shell [bash] scripts really arent that bad, read some bash howtos and bash-scripting howtos. hugh --no expert but can now manage a simple script! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? Create or edit your ~/.xinitrc: exec afterstep I dont know if afterstep is the right afterstep binary, but after exec there should be a path to the windowmanager executable. I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? the same way, but here the executables name is different: exec gnome-session Maybe my .xinitrc can help you any further: #exec gnome-session exec wmaker #exec /tmp/bin/wmaker #exec fluxbox #exec kdeinit #exec blackbox #exec enlightenment #exec e17 #exec esd #exec /opt/garnome/bin/gnome-session Greetings, Roman -- www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg26115/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? i am no expert. but i am enclosing my .xinitrc. i run ion. so if you want to run afterstep or gnome, just change ion to whatever you like. here is my file: #!/bin/sh xscreensaver -no-splash exec ion hth -- regards, sandip p deshmukh --*** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
James Buchanan said: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man startx' but it's all incomprehensible gibberish to me! :-( I did look at xinitrc but again, I can't read shell scripts. None of it looks obvious to me unfortunately. Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? Thanks for any help - btw I am running Potato 2.2r6. I am cc'n you since, due to the attacks it is taking a long time for email to get processed, my last email to the list took almost 4 hours.. normally I don't CC:, but in this case, you may get the info faster :) I use afterstep, what I do: echo exec `which afterstep` ~/.xinitrc afterstep 1.6(What I run in woody, this is the same ver in potato) has a list of window managers in the debian menu(mine only has KDE and afterstep but I think thats all I have installed). just be sure you have the menu package installed. nate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:28:45PM +1100, James Buchanan wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? I have done `man In addition to the other suggestions already posted, the packages selectwm and wmanager both offer the functionality to Select a window manager at X startup. Can't vouch for either one, but there you go. msg26155/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Window Managers
James Buchanan wrote: Hi, When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? Several people have answered this question, but I haven't seen a response to your desire for a menu. The easiest way would be to run a graphical session manager like gdm or kdm, which will let you pick from a list of installed wm's each time you log in via that session manager. If you wanted to stay away from graphical session managers, you could roll your own text-based script (someone's probably already done it and made it available, so you could roll your own or spend time looking for someone else's script). Oh yes, apparently Gnome is installed, but how do I run it? I believe it's exec gnome-session in your ~/.xinitrc, but don't quote me on that. Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Window Managers
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:24:47AM -0600, Kent West wrote: James Buchanan wrote: When I run `startx' I would like afterstep to run, and I would like a menu giving me a list of all the window managers/desktop environments that I can run. How do I tell startx to run afterstep by default? Several people have answered this question, but I haven't seen a response to your desire for a menu. The easiest way would be to run a graphical session manager like gdm or kdm, which will let you pick from a list of installed wm's each time you log in via that session manager. If you wanted to stay away from graphical session managers, you could roll your own text-based script (someone's probably already done it and made it available, so you could roll your own or spend time looking for someone else's script). apt-get install selectwm Add exec selectwm to ~/.xinitrc. You get a menu of all the window managers installed on your system. Regards, -- Sridhar M.A. mophobia, n.: Fear of being verbally abused by a Mississippian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: window-managers don't find their X-fonts
Hi, my problem was solved by installing the package xfonts-base-transcoded. Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window-managers don't find their fonts
Hi, my problem was solved by installing the package xfonts-base-transcoded. Anyway, thank you for helping. Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window-managers don't find their fonts
Sorry Mike, I got a bit confused with this mailing list and didn't realize your answer. Unforunately, now I've opened a new thread with a somewhat more detailed description of my prob Yes, xlsfonts finds all needed fonts, too. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: window-managers don't find their X-fonts
xlsfonts finds all needed fonts, too. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window-managers don't find their fonts
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 12:04:16PM +0200, Hans Musil wrote: My X-server is running, but I can't start neither twm nor fvwm2. When putting exec xterm into my $HOME/.xsession, the xterm appears on the raw X-surface and ist usable. Yes, by creating ~/.xsession, you've taken complete control over the X clients that get started. You've not started a window manager there, therefore one does not get started. Make sure the last line of your ~/.xsession is 'exec fvwm' (or whatever other manager you want to use). Also make sure you are backgrounding any other X clients you start there. Trying to start fvwm2 ends in an error-message, saying that fvwm2 doesn't find its default-font. At the other hand, fslsfonts -server 'unix/:7100' can find all fonts. No, the actual message is no doubt to the effect that it cannot find the 'fixed' font. This is a FAQ. Refer to the X FAQ in the xfree86-common package. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers
Luciano, Informações retiradas do bot apt-br do #debian-br Eu ouvi alguem dizendo que gnome2 eh a versão que está pra ser lançada do Gnome, debs podem ser encontrados na unstable e experimental (se você não sabe o que é a última é melhor não usar =D) - debs para woody na seguinte linha apt: #source.list deb http://gluck.debian.org/~kov/debian woody gnome2 - veja a lista: http://lists.debian.org/debian-gtk-gnome []´s -- .''`. Alex Paulo Laner (rootsh) : :' : GULC - irc.openprojects.net - #gulc `. `'` email - [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian-BR http://debian.br.cipsga.org.br - Mensagem Original De: Luciano sp00ky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Para: Debian debian-user-portuguese@lists.debian.org Assunto: window managers Data: 13/08/02 01:33 Olá pessoal. Li aqui nas mensagens de respostas sobre o X cair de Marcio de Araujo Benedito sobre o gnome2. Gostaria de saber se existe este disponivel para o Debian woody (eu vi que tem o nautilus2) do gnome2 :) E também do KDE3. Que site tenho que adicionar ao meu sources.list ? Obrigado, Luciano -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of quot;unsubscribequot;. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window managers + kdm
On Thu 31 Jan 2002 20:45, Christian Lyra wrote: ois, Alguem sabe como adicionar um novo window manager no menu do kdm? eu costumo compilar o meu proprio Fvwm2 (com tudo que tem direito... inclusive strokes :-) ). O kdm tem mudado bastante e ja nao sei mais como adicionar o fvwm2 no menu antes era so editar o kdmrc depois tinha que criar um arquivo dentro do /etc/X11/wm e agora? ah... Debian Unstable (vivendo perigosamente). Christian Lyra Aqui ele é adicionada automaticamente... Você compila usando o apt-get source? Tenta isto... -- Raphael Derosso Pereira - DephiNit *-=-*-=--=-*-=-*-=--=*=-* / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / *-=-*-=--=-*-=-*-=--=*=-* -=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=- | Debian GNU/Linux Addicted User | | Use it, Abuse it. It's Free!!! | -=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=-
Re: window managers + kdm
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 08:45:24PM -0200, Christian Lyra wrote: ois, Alguem sabe como adicionar um novo window manager no menu do kdm? eu costumo compilar o meu proprio Fvwm2 (com tudo que tem direito... inclusive strokes :-) ). O kdm tem mudado bastante e ja nao sei mais como adicionar o fvwm2 no menu antes era so editar o kdmrc depois tinha que criar um arquivo dentro do /etc/X11/wm e agora? ah... Debian Unstable (vivendo perigosamente). Parâmetro SessionTypes em /etc/kde2/kdm/kdmrc. Se você instala o pacote do fvwm2 oficial Debian ele é automaticamente adicionado a lista de sessões disponíveis. -- ++--++ || Andre Luis Lopes [EMAIL PROTECTED] || || Debian-BR Project http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br || || Personal Web Site http://www.utah.com.br/~andrelop || || Public GPG KeyID 9D1B82F6 || || Keyserver wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net || pgp0VOekJw8oB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: window-managers and GUI environments
On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 10:18:14PM -0700, S. Champ wrote: [ alternate subject-line: the big ol' debian tree. : GUI node. ] hi. while i'm still working on getting debian installed, i'd like to look ahead to what options are available among the windowing environments. I'm not sure but wouldn't X Windows be the windowing environment and not each window manager? Afterstep and sawfish are window managers, Gnome and KDE are desktop environments that run in addition to a window manager. i know of the following: Gnome (? uses motif? ) Gnome uses gtk [http://www.gnome.org] [http://www.gtk.org] KDE (? uses Q? ) Qt. Afterstep (? is this still used by anyone? an analogue of it is heavily used in the ms-w community, under the name 'litestep' ) I've never heard of litestep but if the ms-w community uses it I highly doubt it has anything to do with afterstep because ms-w is pretty much a one desktop thing. Afterstep is still being developed AFAIK, but I personally do not like it as much as, say, WindowMaker. and i'd like to build some sort of a tree for helping folks to choose from among the options, and to install the chosen one(s). (~~ external links, wget-lists, etc. ) this'll take some doc-digging on my own, and may take some package-building if there are options that aren't yet *.deb'd , but i wanted to gather the comments from the community, about it, and to pick up on what other options there may be for a linux GUI. Debian seems to have a good selection of window managers. Personally, I use sawfish (was called sawmill). When I'm in the eyecandy mood, I use Gnome with sawfish. Don't forget the classic fvwm. thank you. -- s.c. BTW, I think cross-posting on the debian lists is a no no...? -- Pat Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] For children with short attention spans: boomerangs that don't come back.
Re: window-managers and GUI environments
For a good index of window managers and desktop enviroments under X-window, have a look at http://www.PLiG.org/xwinman/ It has a short introduction to X, window managers and desktop environments. Not all of the systems it describes are available in debian (some of them are not free). (And BTW, Gnome doesn't use motif, it uses gtk, which is nicer and free ;) Enrique. On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 10:18:14PM -0700, S. Champ wrote: while i'm still working on getting debian installed, i'd like to look ahead to what options are available among the windowing environments. i know of the following: Gnome (? uses motif? ) KDE (? uses Q? ) Afterstep (? is this still used by anyone? an analogue of it is heavily used in the ms-w community, under the name 'litestep' )
Re: window-managers and GUI environments
while i'm still working on getting debian installed, i'd like to look ahead to what options are available among the windowing environments. i know of the following: Gnome (? uses motif? ) KDE (? uses Q? ) Afterstep (? is this still used by anyone? an analogue of it is heavily used in the ms-w community, under the name 'litestep' ) I have been using (at home): icewm + dfm This is a really light system and I'm really satisfied with the filemanager dfm. You can create icons to start programs and configure the system as well so that a certain kind of file is always opend with a certain program. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: window-managers and GUI environments
On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 10:18:14PM -0700, S. Champ wrote: [ alternate subject-line: the big ol' debian tree. : GUI node. ] hi. while i'm still working on getting debian installed, i'd like to look ahead to what options are available among the windowing environments. i know of the following: Gnome (? uses motif? ) KDE (? uses Q? ) Afterstep (? is this still used by anyone? an analogue of it is heavily used in the ms-w community, under the name 'litestep' ) and i'd like to build some sort of a tree for helping folks to choose from among the options, and to install the chosen one(s). (~~ external links, wget-lists, etc. ) This already exists, somewhat: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/ Under Debian, if you install a set of window managers, you can generally switch between them from the root window menus. Exceptions tend to be GNOME and KDE (you can log out but not switch to another WM, though you can often substitute another WM for the default), and twm, which doesn't seem to have this menu option. I prefer WindowMaker to Afterstep. Appearance is quite similar, function is IMO smoother. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~kmself Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.http://www.opensales.org What part of Gestalt don't you understand? Debian GNU/Linux rocks! http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/K5: http://www.kuro5hin.org GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0 pgpnMtqYKsvea.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: window-managers
On Sun, Jun 04, 2000 at 07:09:28PM +0100, Daniel Burrows wrote: I am trying to register KDE as a window-manager in /etc/alternatives using update-alternatives. I can't seem to get it to register - kde is in /usr/bin so I tryed adding it like this: update-alternatives --install kde kde /usr/bin 9 but I can't see it when I run: update-alternatives --config x-window-manager I probably just got the parameters wrong for the first one - Can someone please correct it for me? Please 'CC' me a reply. update-alternatives is kind of confusing at first ;) update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/x-window-manager x-window-manager /usr/bin/kde 9 update-alternatives --remove x-window-manager /usr/bin/kde You can also specify the location of documentation with the slave link. But didn't the KDE .debs take care of this? If your not using the debs, you really shouldn't put the executables in /usr. Should use /usr/local/kde or /opt/kde. -- ¶ One·should·only·use·the·ASCII·characterset·when·compos » ing·email·messages.
Re: window-managers
It's not registered, so any ideas how to do this? I can't get anywhere with it. Eric G . Miller wrote: On Sun, May 28, 2000 at 08:35:24PM +0100, Daniel Burrows wrote: I have just upgraded to potato. Previously, in slink, I had setup my window-managers file to start kde by default but now I get fvwm2 when I type startx. Why is this? The file still points to kde as the first option - is there a different config file for this in potato? Potato now uses the alternatives system to configure the default window manager. Basically it's bunch of symlinks. First, you have /usr/bin/x-window-manager which points to /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager which points to the real window manager. The easy way to update this system is to run update-alternatives --config x-window-manager as root. It should list all of the available (or registered) window managers from which you can select. If you have compiled a window manager in /usr/local then the system won't know about it and you'll need to register this window manager. Confused? You can try to decipher the man pages for update-alternatives... (Despite the somewhat confusing system, it now brings X in line with many other programs that provide a generic something, like editor, emacs, web server, etc...)
Re: window-managers
On Sun, May 28, 2000 at 08:35:24PM +0100, Daniel Burrows wrote: I have just upgraded to potato. Previously, in slink, I had setup my window-managers file to start kde by default but now I get fvwm2 when I type startx. Why is this? The file still points to kde as the first option - is there a different config file for this in potato? Potato now uses the alternatives system to configure the default window manager. Basically it's bunch of symlinks. First, you have /usr/bin/x-window-manager which points to /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager which points to the real window manager. The easy way to update this system is to run update-alternatives --config x-window-manager as root. It should list all of the available (or registered) window managers from which you can select. If you have compiled a window manager in /usr/local then the system won't know about it and you'll need to register this window manager. Confused? You can try to decipher the man pages for update-alternatives... (Despite the somewhat confusing system, it now brings X in line with many other programs that provide a generic something, like editor, emacs, web server, etc...) -- ¶ One·should·only·use·the·ASCII·characterset·when·compos » ing·email·messages.
Re: window-managers
On Sun, May 28, 2000 at 04:21:54PM -0700, Eric G . Miller wrote: If you have compiled a window manager in /usr/local then the system won't know about it and you'll need to register this window manager. Or you can just change the /etc/alternatives symlinks by hand, and the system will realize you've made a change and not change things until you update-alternatives --auto or --config. -- finger for GPG public key. pgpdzNbOF770z.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: window managers
On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, pplaw wrote: pplaw debs, pplaw pplaw how do tell twm not to be my window manager when i type startx? edit ~/.xinitrc and change it, or if that file does not exist add a line: exec /path/to/your/favorite/wm or edit /etc/X11/window-managers and comment some out, change the order..anything nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- 12:32pm up 88 days, 5 min, 1 user, load average: 1.86, 1.68, 1.64
Re: window managers
You wrote: debs, how do i prevent twm from automatically being my window manager when i type startx? This is determined by the file: /etc/X11/window-managers. The first one is what gets used. - Brian poe % cat window-managers # /etc/X11/window-managers # # This file contains a list of available window managers. The default # Xsession file will start the first window manager that it can in this # list. See the window-managers(5) and register-window-manager(8) manual # pages for more information. /usr/bin/kde /usr/bin/X11/kde /usr/bin/X11/fvwm2 /usr/bin/X11/fvwm95 /usr/bin/X11/wmaker /usr/bin/X11/olwm /usr/bin/X11/scwm /usr/bin/X11/afterstep /usr/bin/X11/ctwm /usr/bin/X11/wm2
