| 1 |
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 03:40:56PM +0200, meino.cramer@×××.de wrote: |
| 2 |
> I would like to hear from others what experiences they made with |
| 3 |
> what windowmanagers. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Hi! |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I've been using fvwm2 (http://fvwm.org) for years now and am quite happy with |
| 8 |
it. Although it may look old and strange at first (the default settings are |
| 9 |
rather horrible IIRC), it is possible to configure every tiny detail of it |
| 10 |
using config files. I am still sometimes amazed of what you can do with it. |
| 11 |
The fvwm manpage has everything you need to know. |
| 12 |
The complexity is also its main drawback: it took me several weeks to have |
| 13 |
it the way I wanted it. fvwm is indeed rather complicated at first but that's |
| 14 |
why it's so powerful. It is really flexible and you can still use all the |
| 15 |
little gui tools out there from other window managers. One cool feature of fvwm |
| 16 |
is that you can assign different window styles based on the application, e.g. I |
| 17 |
have a graphical system monitor on my third desktop, that is started when I log |
| 18 |
in via .xinitrc and always stays on bottom, never gets the focus and does not |
| 19 |
appear in the window list or on the task bar, so it does not interfere with the |
| 20 |
rest of the system at all. |
| 21 |
Before using fvwm2 I used KDE which had too much stuff I didn't really need. |
| 22 |
(However, I am still using the KDE kicker panel with fvwm, which I think is |
| 23 |
quite funny.) When I looked for a new window manager I tried fluxbox for a few |
| 24 |
days, but it did not convince me. Then I tried fvwm and stayed with it. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Regards, |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Lars Gustäbel |
| 30 |
lars@×××××××××.de |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little |
| 33 |
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. |
| 34 |
(Benjamin Franklin) |
Archives