Re: Small footprint window manager
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 05:06:53PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-05-11 at 20:08, craigw wrote:
> > On Sat May 11, 2002 at 11:57:19PM +0200, Mario Vukelic wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2002-05-11 at 23:37, Miroslav Mazurek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I need som recomendation for some realy small footprint window manager (it
> > > > should run on 386/16MB). What's best choice?
> > >
> > > Choose: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/others.html
> > >
> > > blackbox is nice, as is icewm. Personally I always recommend to at least
> > > try Ion http://www.students.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/ (on any machine, 386 or
> > > P4). It needs some getting used to since it's a totally different
> > > approach (and handles multi-window apps like gimp rather badly) but wow,
> > > is it cool. Also a great choice for smaller screens (laptops)
> > > --
> > I highly recommend blackbox, fluxbox, & icewm.
> >
> > I have never tried ion, but there is another nice, unusual, and
> > extremely lightweight & easily configurable (keybindings & such) window
> > manager called pwm:
> > http://www.students.tut.fi/~tuomov/pwm/
> > For some reason, I had the feeling that pwm had evolved from ion, but
> > when I went to retrieve that link just now, I see it calls ion
> > "A keyboard friendly window manager based on PWM."
>
> Isn't this all rather academic, since Miroslav has a _386_ with
> only SIXTEEN MB RAM? Running X would be folly!! Not only is the
> CPU old and slow, but so is the RAM, HDD, video card, etc. And
> the HDD will tiny!!!
I used to run X on Slackware Linux on a machine with "only" 16MB and
a 540MB drive, which was split four ways between linux, dos, WinNT
3, and OS/2. I'd say it should work fine.
And if it doesn't, he should go grab an old copy of Slackware and
use that, because we *know* it will run on that hardware.
-jwb
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: