Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] suggested Window Manager good for audio?
From: Erik Steffl (steffl_AT_bigfoot.com)
Date: Thu Feb 19 2004 - 01:51:45 EET
Matthew Allen wrote:
> That's just the main binary for fvwm. If you include all of the
> modules I think it would put it up past icewm and maybe even past
> fluxbox. My linux box is at home, but I'll check tonight.
but you don't have to use _all_ the modules, that's why they are in
modules, because they not neccessary (IIRC I only use FvwmAuto,
FvwmPager, sometime FvwmButtons)
fvwm is very configurable, you can bring your machine to it's knees
by dynamic menus, FvwmEvents (programmable actions based on WM events
like new window or resize etc.), changing backgrounds when changing
virtual screens etc. you don't have to though:-) and lot of
functionality that you don't use is not even loaded (because it's in
modules).
erik
>
> m.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: linux-audio-user-bounces_AT_music.columbia.edu [mailto:linux-audio-
>>user-bounces_AT_music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Frank Barknecht
>>Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] suggested Window Manager good for
>
> audio?
>
>>Judging by file size, fluxbox is rather bloated, but blackbox comes
>>out smallest - not counting the anorectic window managers like swm or
>>failsafewm (ouch!) from www.small-window-manager.de:
>>
>>-rwxrwxr-x 1 freak freak 7404 Feb 18 23:58 failsafewm
>>-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 257472 Apr 14 2003
>
> /usr/bin/blackbox
>
>>-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 359160 Mar 23 2003 /usr/bin/fvwm2
>>-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 406668 Mar 13 2003 /usr/bin/icewm
>>-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 625828 Jan 27 2003
>
> /usr/bin/fluxbox
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> Scanned on 18 Feb 2004 23:30:52
> Scanning by http://erado.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 19 2004 - 01:52:14 EET