Re: Window managers-which one?

[cothrige]

* 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?

[Clive Menzies]

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?

[Liam O'Toole]

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?

[Seeker5528]

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?

[Brad Sims]

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?

[Kelly Clowers]

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?

[Marc Shapiro]

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?

[Andrei Popescu]

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]

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?

[Mladen Adamovic]

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?

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

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?

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

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?

[Ron Johnson]

-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?

[Anthony Campbell]

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?

[George Borisov]

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?

[Mark Grieveson]

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-which one?

[B. Hoffmann]

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?

[Marc Shapiro]

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?

[Ron Johnson]

-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?

[Clive Menzies]

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?

[Jeronimo Pellegrini]

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?

[Ismael Valladolid Torres]

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?

[Jeronimo Pellegrini]

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?

[Jason Dunsmore]

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?

[Douglas Tutty]

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?

[George Borisov]

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?

[Jochen Schulz]

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]
 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Window managers-which one?

[Ron Johnson]

-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?

[George Borisov]

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?

[Clive Menzies]

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

[Skylar Thompson]

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

[John L Fjellstad]

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

[welly hartanto]

--- 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

[Jon Dowland]

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]

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 with maximize-vertical?

[Karsten M. Self]

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.   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?

[Micha Feigin]

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?

[Erik Steffl]

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?

[Marc Wilson]

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?

[Travis Crump]

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?

[Johann Koenig]

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?

[Sven Arvidsson]

> > 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 
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?

[Marc Wilson]

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?

[Tim Connors]

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?

[Anthony Campbell]

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?

[Cristian Gutierrez]

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 with maximize-vertical?

[Marc Wilson]

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?

[Johann Koenig]

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?

[James Tappin]

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?

[Dave Thorn]

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?

[Monique Y. Herman]

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?

[Monique Y. Herman]

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?

[Marc Wilson]

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.





  

  


  


  

 



or, if you like the 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?

[Philipp Weis]

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

[James Tappin]

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

[James Buchanan]

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

[Osamu Aoki]

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

[Sridhar M.A.]

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

[Kent West]

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

[ludwig]

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

[nate]

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

[Sandip P Deshmukh]

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

[Roman Joost]

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

[Hugh Saunders]

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

[Karsten M. Self]

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 don't find their fonts

[Hans Musil]

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 X-fonts

[Hans Musil]

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

[Marc Wilson]

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 don't find their X-fonts

[Hans Musil]

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

[Hans Musil]

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 and GUI environments

[kmself]

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  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 and GUI environments

[virtanen]

> > 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

[Enrique Robledo Arnuncio]

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

[Pat Mahoney]

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

[Eric G . Miller]

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

[Daniel Burrows]

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

[Brad]

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

[Eric G . Miller]

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

[Brian Boonstra]

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

Re: window managers

[aphro]

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 or desktop managers...

[Paul Seelig]

On Fri, 10 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> One that machine, I use FXCE,
> which looks a lot like CDE, but uses GTK. I don't believe it is packaged
> for Debian (at least, not for slink), but it's relatively painless to
> build and install from source (./configure ; make ; make install). It's
> available from www.xfce.org, I believe, if you are interested.
> 
I've made an unofficial Debian package of the latest XFCE-3.1.0 which is
available from "ftp://ntama.uni-mainz.de/pub/debian/unofficial/"; in the
binary/source directories.
 Cheers, P. *8^)
-- 
Please always reply to "Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"

Re: Window managers or desktop managers...

[damon]

On Wed, Sep 08, 1999 at 08:52:43PM +0200, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal was heard to 
state:
> I just wanna know opinions. What do you think is better/faster to use,
> GNOME/Enlightenment, Window Maker or Enlightenment? Why?

This is a real flame-bait topic - everyone has their own opinions and
preferences.

At home, I'm very happy with enlightenment and GNOME, but I also have
KDE installed.

At work, I have a much less powerful machine, which only does 256
colours, so GNOME/E would be a nightmare. One that machine, I use FXCE,
which looks a lot like CDE, but uses GTK. I don't believe it is packaged
for Debian (at least, not for slink), but it's relatively painless to
build and install from source (./configure ; make ; make install). It's
available from www.xfce.org, I believe, if you are interested.

HTH,

damon

-- 
Damon Muller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) /  It's not a sense of humor.
* Criminologist /  It's a sense of irony
* Webmeister   /  disguised as one.
* Linux Geek  / - Bruce Sterling 

Re: Window managers or desktop managers...

[Marcin Kurc]

Enlightenment  sure looks nice but is pretty slow. You can also use GNOME with 
Windowmaker.
IMHO, Windowmaker is small, fast, clean and highly configurable.
You may also want to check blackbox.


On Wed, Sep 08, 1999 at 08:52:43PM +0200, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: 
> Hi all,
> 
> I just wanna know opinions. What do you think is better/faster to use,
> GNOME/Enlightenment, Window Maker or Enlightenment? Why?
> 
> Window maker is more advanced that Enlightenment, isn't it ?
> 
> Bye.
> 
> ---
>  ** Powered by Debian/GNU Linux **
>  Linux User 140860   Machine 61143
> 
> Juli-Manel Merino Vidal -->> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://jmmv.cjb.net

-- 
Marcin Kurc
Indiana Institute of Technology
System Administrator
http://me.indtech.edu   http://www.indtech.edu

Re: Window Managers..

[Dale Scheetz]

On Sun, 16 Nov 1997, Zach Wilkes wrote:

> okay I've used linux for a little bit now but I have yet to figure
> this one out..  How do you change the window manager for X?   and
> where does one get new window managers? I was reading boot magazine
> the other day and it had an article on linux and it had a picture of a
> really cool geiger-esque window manager and I was wondering where one
> would get something like that..
> 
>   Thanx,
>  Zach
>  
First, I would encourage you to take a look at my book (there is a freely
distributable html version of the book available at www.linuxpress.com,
where you can order the print version of the book as well)

In chapter 5, on X11 installation, page 136 gives a list of available
window manager for 1.3 along with some explanation on installation.

When you install a new window manager package it will ask you if you wish
this window manager to be the default. If you say yes it will add that WM
to the top of the list in /etc/X11/window-managers. If you start your
server with xdm, that is the window manager that will come up. (This may
also work for other methods {like startx} but I am only familiar with xdm)

Luck,

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-_-  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz   Phone:   1 (904) 656-9769
  Flexible Software  11000 McCrackin Road
  e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers..

[Tim Ferrell]

On 16 Nov, Zach Wilkes let loose with:
> okay I've used linux for a little bit now but I have yet to figure
> this one out..  How do you change the window manager for X?   and
> where does one get new window managers? I was reading boot magazine
> the other day and it had an article on linux and it had a picture of a
> really cool geiger-esque window manager and I was wondering where one
> would get something like that..
> 
>   Thanx,
>  Zach

Hey Zach - 

The window manager in question was Enlightenment, which you can get
from http://www.mandrake.net/e/ (follow the link to the ftp directory
on the download page) There you will find a debian-deb directory. Be
aware, however, that last I checked those packages were not up to date
- you would be better of getting the tar.gz package. Everything
installs to /usr/local/enlightenment so removing it would not be a
problem... but why would you want to do that?! 

To change your window manager, simply create a file called .xinitrc in
your home directory that looks like this:

- begin sample -

#!/bin/bash

xset m 6 3 &
xset s off &
exec enlightenment

- end -

The first two commands setup the mouse and screen blanking (see the
xset man page for more details) and then the last line calls the window
manager of your choosing. Make sure to not put the & after the line
that calls the wm...

HTH,
- Tim

-- 
Debian GNU LinuxPower to the people...

E-Mail:   Tim Ferrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]  



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers..

[Will Lowe]

On Sun, 16 Nov 1997, Zach Wilkes wrote:

> this one out..  How do you change the window manager for X?   and
> where does one get new window managers? I was reading boot magazine

We have many window manager packages -- fvwm,  fvwm95,  fvwm2,  olvwm,
kde,  even more -- just look under X11 on the website.

Basically,  to change window managers,  edit your ~/.xsession file,  and
make the last line be the name of the window manager you want to run.  For
example,  here's my .xsession,  which starts up a bunch of utilities and
then runs kwm:

#!/bin/sh
# .xsession script to start x
#
# Edited Sat Aug 9 Will Lowe

xset b 40 300 100   # change default system beep
xset +dpms  # enable monitor power save mode
xset dpms 500 2000 3000 # set blank/sleep/off times for monitor
xset m 8 10 # set up mouse acceleration
kfm &
kdisplay -init&
kpanel &
krootwm &
exec kwm 


NOTE that most entries end in "&" except the last one.





Will


--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
|   http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/   |
--
|   You say "Love is a temple.  Love the higher law."|
|   You ask me to enter,  but then you make me crawl.| 
| And I can't be holding on to what you got  |
|  When all you got is hurt. |
--





--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: xinitrc vs. xsession (was Re: Window Managers)

[Buddha Buck]

> On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Gary L. Dolan wrote:
> 
> > I hate to think that my version of 1.2 (now 1.3) is idiosyncratic, but the
> > global xsession and the global xinitrc files are identical. I have attempted
> > in my own halting way to parse my way thru the file(s), and the result 
> > appears to me to be that some resource files do not get read. I would be
> > pleased if someone would correct my impression if I am wrong.
> 
> 
> My second point is (possibly a bug). Shouldn't /etc/Xsession have $startup
> defined as .xsession and /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc have $startup defined as
> ..xinitrc? At the moment, both files have $startup defined as .xsession. Is
> this a bug?

On my system (using XFree86 3.3-3, except for xbase, which is 3.3-2), 
/etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc is a symbolic link to /etc/X11/Xsession, which 
is how you described it.  So the global xsession and the global xinitrc 
are in fact the same file.

My $HOME on my system only has a .xsession, but on other accounts, I 
routinely have .xinitrc a symlink to .xsession, so I only have to deal 
with one startup file.

Perhaps it should be better documented that .xsession and 
/etc/X11/Xsession are the Debian way to do it.  When I was figuring 
this out months ago, it was a tedious matter of chasing through man 
pages to find the config files that specified the start-up scripts, 
which were symlinks to the real scripts, etc, all to find out that I 
was looking for .xsession.


-- 
 Buddha Buck  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
liberty depends upon the chaos and cacaphony of the unfettered speech
the First Amendment protects."  -- A.L.A. v. U.S. Dept. of Justice


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

xinitrc vs. xsession (was Re: Window Managers)

[Colin R. Telmer]

On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Gary L. Dolan wrote:

> I hate to think that my version of 1.2 (now 1.3) is idiosyncratic, but the
> global xsession and the global xinitrc files are identical. I have attempted
> in my own halting way to parse my way thru the file(s), and the result 
> appears to me to be that some resource files do not get read. I would be
> pleased if someone would correct my impression if I am wrong.

I don't exactly know what you are asking. First, I knew the files had the
same functionality, but I never looked to see if they are the same. I have
two completely separate things to say about this so I will separate them
as I think one may be a bug:

Given they have the same functionality, they both basically define and
source a couple of system files (Xresources and Xmodmap) and then source
individual user files (.Xmodmap and .Xsession). They then go onto do some
other stuff and then they source a users startup file (.xsession). If that
file exists, the rest of the global file does not get sourced, rather the
user file is used in its place. This is all done within the last unnested
if statement which is

if [ -x $startup ] && grep -q ^allow-user-xsession /etc/X11/config
then
  exec $startup
else
  xterm -ls &
  if [ -e /etc/X11/window-managers ]
  then
for i in `sed 's/#.*//' /etc/X11/window-managers`
do
  if [ -x $i ]
  then
exec $i
  fi
done
  fi
  if [ -x /usr/X11R6/bin/fvwm ]
  then
exec fvwm
  fi
  exec twm
fi  
--

So if $startup exists, then that file is read rather than the rest of the
above. So if you want to run different window manager rather than the
default one listed in /etc/X11/window-managers, then take this above piece
without the if statement regarding /etc/X11/window-managers and put it in
.xsession with your window manager of choice. For instance, if I always
wanted to run kdm, my .xsession could look as simple as
--
#!/bin/sh

exec kdm
--

I actually always run fvwm2 and I have a few customizations in my
.xsession which is
--
#!/bin/sh

source /etc/profile
source ~/.bash_profile

if [ -x /usr/lib/plan/pland ] ; then
  exec /usr/lib/plan/pland -k &
fi

exec fvwm2
-

I hope I am getting my point across.


My second point is (possibly a bug). Shouldn't /etc/Xsession have $startup
defined as .xsession and /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc have $startup defined as
.xinitrc? At the moment, both files have $startup defined as .xsession. Is
this a bug?

Cheers.

--
  Colin R. Telmer, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations
School of Policy Studies, Queen's University
 Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L-3N6
  (613)545-6000x4219   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   PGP Public Key at http://terrapin.econ.queensu.ca>



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers

[Gary L. Dolan]

On Thu, Jul 03, 1997 at 10:12:01AM -0400, Colin R. Telmer wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, David Kohel wrote:
> 
> > I just set up and configured xdm (thanks to those who responded 
> > with advice on shadow passwords, etc.), and by default, xdm 
> > sources the $HOME/.xsession files, not $HOME/.xinitrc files.  
> 
> If you use xdm, .xsession is the individual user configuration. If you
> just run X through startx or xinit, then .xinitrc is the file to use. Look
> into /etc/X11/xdm for the global Xsession and in /etc/X11/xinit for the
> global xinitrc.

I hate to think that my version of 1.2 (now 1.3) is idiosyncratic, but the
global xsession and the global xinitrc files are identical. I have attempted
in my own halting way to parse my way thru the file(s), and the result 
appears to me to be that some resource files do not get read. I would be
pleased if someone would correct my impression if I am wrong.
-- 
Gary


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers

[Jens B. Jorgensen]

George Bonser wrote:
> 
> In their .xinitrc
> 
> On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Joe Lillibridge wrote:
> 
> > How can users specify their own window managers?  I.E., User A wants to
> > run fvwm & User B wants to run afterstep.  I'm using xdm.
> >

No, this is not correct, since xinit is an *alternative* way to start
the X system if you aren't running xdm. The proper place is in 
$HOME/.xsession. You must have 'allow-user-xsession' in /etc/X11/config
in addition. Also, make sure $HOME/.xsession has executable 
permissions for the user or it won't be run. 

-- 
Jens B. Jorgensen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers

[Colin R. Telmer]

On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, David Kohel wrote:

> I just set up and configured xdm (thanks to those who responded 
> with advice on shadow passwords, etc.), and by default, xdm 
> sources the $HOME/.xsession files, not $HOME/.xinitrc files.  

If you use xdm, .xsession is the individual user configuration. If you
just run X through startx or xinit, then .xinitrc is the file to use. Look
into /etc/X11/xdm for the global Xsession and in /etc/X11/xinit for the
global xinitrc. Modify the one you that is applicable and then save it as
the appropriate dot file. Cheers.


--
  Colin R. Telmer, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations
School of Policy Studies, Queen's University
 Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L-3N6
  (613)545-6000x4219   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   PGP Public Key at http://terrapin.econ.queensu.ca>



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers

[David Kohel]

I just set up and configured xdm (thanks to those who responded 
with advice on shadow passwords, etc.), and by default, xdm 
sources the $HOME/.xsession files, not $HOME/.xinitrc files.  
Actually, by default, my initial setup didn't source any user 
files.  See the /etc/X11/Xsession file (read by xdm) and edit 
/etc/X11/config accordingly.  

My /etc/X11/config file now looks like:



xdm-start-server
start-xdm
allow-user-resources
allow-user-modmap
allow-user-xsession



There may be some Debian configuration utility for xdm, but 
I just added in the last three lines by hands.

David 

>
> In their .xinitrc
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Joe Lillibridge wrote:
> 
> > How can users specify their own window managers?  I.E., User A wants to
> > run fvwm & User B wants to run afterstep.  I'm using xdm.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > joe
> > 
> > 
> http://corsica.shorelink.com --  x hosting for $XX.XX / month.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
> Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .






--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: Window Managers

[George Bonser]

In their .xinitrc



On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, Joe Lillibridge wrote:

> How can users specify their own window managers?  I.E., User A wants to
> run fvwm & User B wants to run afterstep.  I'm using xdm.
> 
> thanks,
> joe
> 

George Bonser
http://corsica.shorelink.com --  x hosting for $XX.XX / month.
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .