Subject: Re: FVWM: New member on list.

From: "Jake Holmen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 02:14:35 GMT

Sure.  I have tried Gnome and KDE - but they both are memory hungry and I 
have a slow machine.

Is there a way to include menu items and have a menu on the desktop at all 
times?

J

>From: Dan Lowe <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: Jake Holmen <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Re: FVWM: New member on list.
>Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:58:17 -0500
>
>Previously, Jake Holmen said:
> > Hi my name is Jake.
> >
> > I have been using fvwm2 for not long.
> > But I wish to ask a couple of questions.
> >
> > 1.  what's a graphical setup program that I can use to set up fvwm2 so 
>that
> > I can have "shortcut icons" (buttons) on the desktop, just like in
> > winhorrible95.
>
>FVWM probably has no facility for this, but you might want to look at the
>GNOME desktop environment (www.gnome.org).  It ships with just about every
>distribution of Linux around, so there's a good chance it's already
>installed on your system.
>
>You can use FVWM as the window manager for GNOME if you want, but you're
>better off using something like Enlightenment because it understands GNOME
>management hints.  See www.enlightenment.org also.
>
>  -dan
>
>--
>GU d+ s+:+ a- C+++ US++++$ P++ L+ E-@ W++ N++ !o K-- w--- O- M- V-- PS+ 
>PE++
>Y+ PGP+ t+@ 5 X+ R- tv b++ DI++++ D+ G e- h--- r+++ y+++ [www.geekcode.com]
>
>An asylum for the sane would be empty in America.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:49:34 -0500

> Is there a way to include menu items and have a menu on the desktop at all 

Right now fvwm menus can't be pinned to the desktop but anything a menu
can do FvwmButtons can do.  See below.

> > > I can have "shortcut icons" (buttons) on the desktop, just like in

Right now fvwm doesn't come with a graphical setup program.
If you visit our web page and look under links the Dotfile generator
or FvwmConf may help you out in that department.

To put buttons on your desktop to launch things you might consider
using FvwmButtons.

> >management hints.  See www.enlightenment.org also.

Hmm...recruiting for E?

--
Dan Espen
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854                     Phone: (732) 699-5570
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dan Lowe <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 01:46:00 -0500

> > >management hints.  See www.enlightenment.org also.

No, I like E in many ways, but it's just not as flexible as FVWM.  It's
also a lot more memory-hungry than FVWM.  I run FVWM (which is why I'm on
this list :-)  And of course, you /can/ use FVWM with GNOME if you choose
to do so (I did this for a long time).

However, FVWM can't do some things that make sense in the GNOME world.  For
instance, the GNOME pager won't work without a GNOME-compliant window
manager such as Enlightenment.  There are some other decoration hint type
of things also.  All in all it's not a big deal - but if you're talking
about Linux (which I think we were here) they're probably already installed
on the machine by default, so it isn't a big deal to load it up and give it
a try, in any case.  With a tiny bit of dot-file editing you can make GNOME
use fvwm or anything else (bb, sawmill, twm, etc).

FVWM is more flexible and lightweight which is why I use it.  And I have a
Sparc Ultra-II class system on my desktop, so I'm not strapped for
resources.  I just like my wm to not be sluggish (half the goal of a window
manager, IMHO, should be to become invisible so you barely even notice it's
there in the first place).

 -dan

-- 
GU d+ s+:+ a- C+++ US++++$ P++ L+ E-@ W++ N++ !o K-- w--- O- M- V-- PS+ PE++
Y+ PGP+ t+@ 5 X+ R- tv b++ DI++++ D+ G e- h--- r+++ y+++ [www.geekcode.com]
  
Atheism is a nonprophet organization.  -George Carlin

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 21 Mar 2000 02:30:36 -0500

%% Dan Lowe <[email-masked]> writes:

  dl> However, FVWM can't do some things that make sense in the GNOME
  dl> world.

The betas of FVWM (2.3.x) have GNOME support.  If it's incomplete or
insufficient please let us know ASAP.

Thanks!

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <[email-masked]>         Network Management Development
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Erik Steffl <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:54:37 -0800

I've read few times that enlightenment is not as flexible as fvwm but
I've seen no actual comparison of features. I have enlightenment on my
home machine (actually, I am trying it out as default window manager for
about a week now). and while the lot of settings can be changed using
menus there is still lot of what cannot be changed in settings menu
(most of it can be probably changed somehow). I have to say that  I have
strong feeling that they really got what they sdaid in the beginning -
the eye candy (that's what I've read on enlightenment web page as a
reason why they started the development of enlightenment). however it
looks like it is not ment to be used... (just to be looked at). that's
more gut feeling than anything else...

  is there some brief comparison of features of enlightenment <-> fvwm?
I mean what can fvwm do that enlightenment cannot and vice versa?
anybody has enough experience with both to comment on this? any
pointers?

  thanks.

	erik

Dan Espen wrote:
...
> > >From: Dan Lowe <[email-masked]>
...

---

From: Graeme McCaffery <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 18:58:18 +0000

I've been usuing Fvwm for about 8 years now and I like how it has evolved.

>From what I've heard from the KDE people is that their new window manager will
have the kind of functionality that fvwm has. it will be able to have a small
memory footprint which can be increased as new features are desired.
to add styles you simply add a dynamically loaded module. I guess it's just a
matter how basic they decide the manager can be and what eyecandy and
unessential features they put in to the modules.

have the fvwm developers had a look at this? I know it was sort of the plan for
fvwm3. what will fvwm do? wind up or follow?

Graeme