Re: Debian Users...
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 09:40:50PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:29:27PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote:
> > >
> > >Geez, no fvwm users yet?
> > >(Not that I usually answer these polls)
> > >
> > >Of course, I have a setup I have been happy with for 6 years, so it was
> > >only 6 months back that I decided to upgrade from fvwm1 to 2.
> >
> > Well, quite. I've got a fvwm setup that I've been tuning for ~10
> > years. I made the swap to fvwm2 about 5 years ago. In fact,
> > checking... Yay! my m4-ified fvwm2rc is still in the package as an
> > example. I should probably update that, as by now it probably won't
> > work too well.
> >
> > Fvwm is cool. It takes a fair bit of configuration, but it's fast,
> > small and absolutely bomb-proof in my experience. And several of the
> > newer WMs still don't match its features...
>
> Bulletproof my oath. One thing you *never* *ever* want to segfault is your
> window manager. Because if you have been logged in for 60 days, there is a
> lot of state stored on your desktop[1] that you don't want lost when the
> WM dies, gives control back to X, and X quits on you. (I saw someone on a
> solaris box with a 250 day uptime, using the same session of fvwm he
> started on the first day (that was when he moved to that site))
>
> The window manager should be the most reliable peice of software on the
> system next to your kernel, and I can't say too many positive things about
> the reliability of some WM's.
>
> As it is, I did have the occasional segfault while trialing FVWM 2.5 (the
> unstable tree), and as such made a tiny shell script that continually
> respawns fvwm as long as the exit code is greater than 130, and invoke
> that instead if fvwm in my ~/.xsession
>
> As for configuration, my personal view is that the default configuration
> for fvwm is crap. Not very poweful and crap. The reason people *think*
> fvwm is crap, is because they never go past the default config. If there
> was a better config straight off, maybe people wouldn't be turned away so
> quickly?
I actually tried fvwm2 and left it because it takes too long to get the
basic configuration right.
I don't mind slowly improving the configuration as things move along and
I see what I really need, but it really helps being able to get
something mostly ok quickly and then learning slowly how to fix it.
Spending two days building a proper configuration just to see if the
window manager fits the bill is too long.
It might be better then a proper basic configuration to have a proper
configuration tool that could twick the menus, hotkeys, some basic look
twicking and enable a hiding pager (on a small screen it can really help
if the pager docks off somewhere and reappear when the mouse is over it).
I tried the dotconfig thingy (Don't remember its exact name) and it was
unusable, never producing a proper configuration.
>
>
> [1]In the form of XEmacs buffers and layout, mozilla windows, 1001 xterms,
> login session, etc.
>
> --
> TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/
> We don't need no education
> We don't need no thought control
> -- Pink Floyd, Another Brick in the Wall
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-laptop-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: