compare fluxbox and jwm
Forum: X and Fluxbox
Topic: compare fluxbox and jwm
started by: dslrgm
Posted by dslrgm on Dec. 20 2007,22:16Where can I learn about what fluxbox and jwm offer?
The wiki does not seem to have the info.
I use gnome on my servers and main notebooks.
Posted by john.martzouco on Dec. 20 2007,22:59< Fluxbox has their site at SourceForge. >
< Joe's Window Manager seems to be here >.
Maybe some of the other guys will chime in and offer up what they've seen.
I'm not sure what version numbers and what modifications have been made for the DSL project.
I'd like to know the big differences too... if you decide to catalog what you learn as a side-by-side comparison, would you mind sharing it? Maybe you could put up a < Wiki page > and then the comparison could be gathered up there?
I'd like to join the trend and migrate to JWM as well, but there are a few things I'd like to change (in my own system) before I can get comfortable with it. Your lead might be what I need to get inspired.
Posted by mikshaw on Dec. 21 2007,15:04Please understand that the documentation on the Fluxbox site is for version 1. The Fluxbox version in DSL is much older than that (0.1.14), so making a comparison based on the websites is not going to be accurate. The Fluxbox version in DSL has nowhere near the features of version 1.0, but is much lighter and faster.
Posted by dslrgm on Dec. 21 2007,15:58What about the version of jwm?
Posted by dslrgm on Dec. 21 2007,16:20
Well, I think I have found the one item that locks me into jwm:
It has gnome functionality according to joe's web pages.
With vncviewer, I can access a server with gnome gui isntalled (can be running with init 3), and work with the server's gnome desktop, not just plan old raw X.
So now my 'goal' is to see what else I can do in jwm. I suppose one of the next things will be to install openoffice. But I do have to step 'lightly', as this system only has 64Mb memory!
Posted by roberts on Dec. 21 2007,16:28jwm is a very recent 2.0
Run the following to see:
fluxbox is v0.1.14
fluxbox requires more resources and needs additional processes, i.e., fluxter, to provide a pager, than jwm.
fluxbox has a higer learning curve. Miniimzed windows and its Tabbed windows capability.
jwm is more familiar to casual users as it is similiar to the other user inteface that one is forced to use when they buy a computer.
Advanced users usually load their preferred window manager.
I chose JWM for DSL for its familar operation and less resource demands.
Posted by dslrgm on Dec. 21 2007,16:37
v2.0 is only 6 months back. (Not bad compared to what I have 'gotten' use to on Centos thanks to the 'upstream' source).
What is pager? one more tihng to figure out...
Yes, more familiar to those of us having to run linux servers and opting for Centos (Yes I actually have **1** XP system, **2** Win2000 systems, and one NT system ;) ).
I have not felt the urge to try out KDE; too much else to figure out.
Less resources? I can appreciate that on my 64Mb Libretto.
Posted by roberts on Dec. 21 2007,16:44The pager is those little boxes to switch workspaces (desktops).
On a lower resource machine, I would opt for jwm
Test for yourself. boot up jwm and let the system become quiescent and note the memory used and number of processes.
Now boot fluxbox and do the same.
Posted by john.martzouco on Dec. 21 2007,23:44Lower resources... I like that. I like that a lot actually.
There are three or four cosmetic things that I don't like, but I'll try the themes and get that worked out.
[edit: ^thehatsrule^ has offered changes on another thread for the following]
There's one thing that really bothers me though, how can I get rid of the white ovals? I know that they're there to indicate the scope of the command being summoned, but I'd like to try to configure them differently... maybe grey dashed rectangles or darker ovals or just not there at all. Is there a config for this somewhere?
[end of edit]
Thanks, this has been enticing,
Posted by roberts on Dec. 22 2007,03:17Just look at the difference in binary size alone.
This not even counting the /usr/share/fluxbox directory.
And this is for a very old version of fluxbox. Newer versions are even larger.
Posted by john.martzouco on Dec. 22 2007,11:18
It's getting clearer and clearer why you chose JWM. It totally helps to understand these issues... thank you for yor patience, and sharing your knowledge.
It's crystal clear to me that you're leading this ship with a keen eye! Your architectural changes have been brilliant and I stand in awe at the unprecedented size / quality ratio of this project. I thought DSL was amazing before drag'n'drop... now it's in a league completely of it's own and light years ahead of anything else happening!
With the greatest respect and admiration,