Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[RW]

On Friday 02 September 2005 18:19, hal wrote:
> I am currently installing KDE from source and it
> is taking forever.
>
> #cd /usr/ports/x11/KDE3
> # make
>
> Some of the packages needed cannot be found by the
> make file.  Google is great but some of the packages are
> really hard to find.


If you haven't already done so, you might want bring your ports tree up to 
date with cvsup or portsnap. I've never had to resort to google to find 
distfiles.  
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Gary W. Swearingen]

Louis LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> So, two things that are important: ease of configuration and
> flexibility.  You want those small tweaks to be painless, but you also
> want the WM to be able to do what you want it to.  So far, I've not
> found anything I wanted that FVWM2 couldn't do.  Documentation (man
> pages) are well written enough that tweaks are pretty easy to manage
> now too.

Amen.  Want to do something?  Read "man fvwm", edit ".fvwm2".  Done.
I gave KDE a couple of good tries and while it's nice to have on the
Gnoppix Live CDROM, for example, I don't want to climb it's learning
curve to configure it to my own preferences in daily use.

I keep the right 1.5" of my 4-page screen normally devoted to a column
of gizmos that do everything I need to do.  You can easily write
gizmos (eg, Tk/Python) and hook them it into fvwm's button/display
system, though fvwm has all the built-in gizmos I've needed except
my online/offline button/indicator/GMT-display.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Garrett Cooper]

On Sep 3, 2005, at 10:56 AM, Louis LeBlanc wrote:


None of the window managers are difficult to install on FreeBSD, but
some may be tricky to configure.  Maybe most.

If you want a window manager, not a desktop, you don't want KDE.
That's a desktop/WM.  My personal favorite for more than 6 years now
is FVWM2.  Flexible, fast, supports all kinds of cool things, like
fancy key and mouse bindings, Xinerama, etc.

Still, lot's of people like KDE, enlightenment(?), IceWM, the Gnome
Desktop, etc.

My advice is try a few different ones before deciding.  See how
intiutive or simple you find configuration (I like FVWM2 because it's
simple text file configuration, and manpages are quite thorough).
Just remember, you will probably get a basic configuration set up the
way you want and not really touch it for a long time.  Then one day,
you'll look at it to tweak some behavior.  My config has only changed
a little over the last 6 years, and only one or two small tweaks at a
time.  Lots of times, I have to go back to reread documentation or
commentary in the config to figure out what it's doing.

So, two things that are important: ease of configuration and
flexibility.  You want those small tweaks to be painless, but you also
want the WM to be able to do what you want it to.  So far, I've not
found anything I wanted that FVWM2 couldn't do.  Documentation (man
pages) are well written enough that tweaks are pretty easy to manage
now too.

BTW, I'm fairly mouse averse, so I have my config set up to allow me
to keep my hands on the keys until I go into a browser, unless I
decide to exercise the mouse for some reason.  This includes switching
pages on the desktop, switching desktops, switching apps, etc..  If I
go to the mouse, it all works pretty much the same.  Key bindings
allow me to use the fancy buttons on my fancy keyboard to control
audio and video playback, volume - including mute, and window layering
(move to top, bottom, etc.) among many other things.

Good luck.
Lou
--  
Louis LeBlanc  FreeBSD-at-keyslapper-DOT-net

Fully Funded Hobbyist,   KeySlapper Extrordinaire :)
Please send off-list email to: leblanc at keyslapper d.t net
Key fingerprint = C5E7 4762 F071 CE3B ED51  4FB8 AF85 A2FE 80C8 D9A2

VMS, n.:
  The world's foremost multi-user adventure game.


All depends on your taste, like Louis and others have been saying.
If you want a complete desktop system (has a variety of tools,  
etc), try straight Gnome or KDE. As you've discovered though,  
compiling them takes quite a while as they are quite large.
If you just want a WM (a means to view X programs), there are a  
variety of different choices: TWM (prepackaged, ugly), FVWM2, IceWM,  
Enlightenment, Fluxbox, XFCE4.2, and quite a few others exist for  
your X use. No one can really say which is best, I think, as it all  
depends on your choice and preference in terms of interfacing with X  
and programs, as well as how much resources you want to use, etc.
There are also lighter versions of the KDE and-I think it's in  
the ports tree-Gnome meta builds which come with a lot less programs  
if you wish to only install needed and certain components to your  
system.

-Garrett
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Louis LeBlanc]

On 09/02/05 11:19 AM, hal sat at the `puter and typed:
> For FreeBSD 5.4 what is the:
>  default window manager?
>  developer recommended window manager?
>  easiest to install?
> 
> I am not trying to start a religious war here.
> I am currently installing KDE from source and it
> is taking forever.
> 
> #cd /usr/ports/x11/KDE3
> # make
> 
> Some of the packages needed cannot be found by the
> make file.  Google is great but some of the packages are
> really hard to find.

None of the window managers are difficult to install on FreeBSD, but
some may be tricky to configure.  Maybe most.

If you want a window manager, not a desktop, you don't want KDE.
That's a desktop/WM.  My personal favorite for more than 6 years now
is FVWM2.  Flexible, fast, supports all kinds of cool things, like
fancy key and mouse bindings, Xinerama, etc.

Still, lot's of people like KDE, enlightenment(?), IceWM, the Gnome
Desktop, etc.

My advice is try a few different ones before deciding.  See how
intiutive or simple you find configuration (I like FVWM2 because it's
simple text file configuration, and manpages are quite thorough).
Just remember, you will probably get a basic configuration set up the
way you want and not really touch it for a long time.  Then one day,
you'll look at it to tweak some behavior.  My config has only changed
a little over the last 6 years, and only one or two small tweaks at a
time.  Lots of times, I have to go back to reread documentation or
commentary in the config to figure out what it's doing.

So, two things that are important: ease of configuration and
flexibility.  You want those small tweaks to be painless, but you also
want the WM to be able to do what you want it to.  So far, I've not
found anything I wanted that FVWM2 couldn't do.  Documentation (man
pages) are well written enough that tweaks are pretty easy to manage
now too.

BTW, I'm fairly mouse averse, so I have my config set up to allow me
to keep my hands on the keys until I go into a browser, unless I
decide to exercise the mouse for some reason.  This includes switching
pages on the desktop, switching desktops, switching apps, etc..  If I
go to the mouse, it all works pretty much the same.  Key bindings
allow me to use the fancy buttons on my fancy keyboard to control
audio and video playback, volume - including mute, and window layering
(move to top, bottom, etc.) among many other things.

Good luck.
Lou
-- 
Louis LeBlanc  FreeBSD-at-keyslapper-DOT-net
Fully Funded Hobbyist,   KeySlapper Extrordinaire :)
Please send off-list email to: leblanc at keyslapper d.t net
Key fingerprint = C5E7 4762 F071 CE3B ED51  4FB8 AF85 A2FE 80C8 D9A2

VMS, n.:
  The world's foremost multi-user adventure game.


pgpd7BcyMM4TK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Chris]

hal wrote:

For FreeBSD 5.4 what is the:
default window manager?
developer recommended window manager?
easiest to install?



x-11wm/icewm is cool. It's lightweight, seems stable, and looks very 
attractive (imho). It's also quite easy for windoze people to relate to 
(not sure if that is a recommendation or a fault :P). 
games/xdesktopwaves is nice with it.


Chris
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Andrew L. Gould]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 11:19:09 -0600
hal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For FreeBSD 5.4 what is the:
>  default window manager?
>  developer recommended window manager?
>  easiest to install?
> 
> I am not trying to start a religious war here.
> I am currently installing KDE from source and it
> is taking forever.
> 
> #cd /usr/ports/x11/KDE3
> # make
> 
> Some of the packages needed cannot be found by the
> make file.  Google is great but some of the packages are
> really hard to find.
> 
> hal 

Is there a reason you're compiling KDE from source?  KDE is included on
the installation CD's.  Using pkg_add, you can also install binary
packages (and their dependencies) for releases and stable branches from
the ftp sites.  For example, to get KDE for the i386 architecture, 5-
STABLE branch, root would execute:

pkg_add
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-5-stable/All/kde-3.4.2.tbz

(Beware wordwrap in emails.)

Regards,

Andrew Gould
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 11:19:09 -0600
hal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> For FreeBSD 5.4 what is the:
>  default window manager?

if you don't install any wm or D.E. then there's probably only the
ancient twm

> I am currently installing KDE from source and it
> is taking forever.
> 
> #cd /usr/ports/x11/KDE3
> # make

you have the choice for kde-lite btw
(/usr/ports/x11/kde-lite)


KDE, Gnome and xfce4 are Desktop Environments,
they use a wm but they are not wm's itselves


what kind of wm or D.E. do you want ?
one of the most simplistic and light-weight ones is wm2
(see /usr/ports/x11-wm/wm2) takes less than 1 minute to compile afair

if you want a desktop-environment, xfce4 is interesting (lightweight),
but if you're coming from a MS-windows environment you might like KDE
better

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[pete wright]

On 9/2/05, hal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> For FreeBSD 5.4 what is the:
> default window manager?


FreeBSD does not neccessarially install X windows by default, and hence does 
not have a default window manager like say RedHat which has developed thier 
own cross of gnome and kde. When you install x.org  I belive 
it will install twm as a default WM.

developer recommended window manager?
> easiest to install?


I would try using packages to install window managers while checking things 
out. You really do not gain that much by installiing things like this from 
ports performance wise (that is unless you are using aggressive compile time 
optimizations or passing non-standard variables to configure), once you find 
what WM you find most usable you can always remove the packages and install 
your windowmanger of choice from ports.


-p



-- 
~~o0OO0o~~
Pete Wright
www.nycbug.org 
NYC's *BSD User Group
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: FreeBSD vs. window managers

[Mike Hernandez]

I don't think there is a "default". But I can tell you that if you
want something small, try fluxbox-devel from ports, or one of the
other lightweight wm's available there.

Mike
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"