New to Arch, need WM advice

dtjohnst · 2007-03-01 21:10:34

Greetings fellow Archers!! I just wanted to introduce myself, now that I've persevered through all my install problems. :-( I had a heck of a time getting Arch all set up. Tried 3 or 4 different ways to install, none would even boot to allow me to install. After fiddling and finaggling, I finally got her working. To think all it needed (after chrooting into an install environment from my Gentoo and setting up the system) was a stupid earlymodules=piix on the kernel line in my bootloader. Arrggh! Ah well, if I was afraid of hicups and learning I wouldn't be running linux at all, right? Anyways, my triple-boot (Windows/Gentoo/Arch) system is now complete and working great.

I've run a bunch of distros at home before, including Slack, Debian and Mandrake, to name a few. My academic experience takes me through Solaris, BSD and a wealth of others (like an OS programmed entirely in LISP runing on a machine designed to be most efficient when using LISP). My latest "distro of choice" has been Gentoo. It's stable enough for me (in fact, I've had 0 stability problems), it runs quick, and it lets me do everything I want. I enjoy compiling optimized code, but sometimes a guy just doesn't want to wait, know what I mean? Especially when he maybe just wants to try something out.

So, I wanted something equally stable and fast, but that would get software up and running without the wait time of compiling ALL the time and compiling EVERYTHING. But I also wanted a package manager that was robust enough to handle almost anything I can throw at it. Arch seemed the natural choice.

Now, when I first got into *nix OS'es, it was using Solaris 7 at school. With KDE as the ONLY available GUI. A year later GNOME was allowed on Campus and installed on our SPARC's and I've used nothing but ever since. And while I like GNOME and have no complaints, I wonder what I might be missing out on by not experimenting.

I mostly just boot up into a console and don't even load X for most of my normal tasks. But now and then I surf sites that links just doesn't cut it for, play videos/dvd's and stuff like that. I also like doing some graphics work, nothing fancy, just GIMP and whatnot, though I'd like to get into more hardcore rendering and modelling (mostly with Blender I think but that decision will come later).

I'm thinking of maybe giving Fluxbox a try. Or maybe xfce. Enlightenment looks pretty snazzy too. I think any desktop environment will "work", but what I'm looking for one that doesn't have a ton of apps bundled in with it (I'll pick and chose what I want, thank you), but has the flexibility to be customized to look any way I want. That's why I liked GNOME. I could run transparent panels and taskbars, create my own lanchers, whatever I wanted, and then skin it however I wanted, set my own icons, etc.

Any suggestions at all on what might suit my needs?

skymt · 2007-03-01 22:02:12

If you want a somewhat traditional environment, good for light tasks like you describe, give Openbox a shot. It looks nice (better than Fluxbox IMO, but no transparency), is extremely fast, and is just the bare WM. No extra apps needed. It doesn't come with a panel, so if you need one, look into pypanel or fbpanel, or just use the panel from Gnome, XFCE, or KDE.

Fluxbox is also good, and has a panel built in. It's not as flexible as Openbox (mouse bindings, anyone?), but gives a better environment out-of-the-box. Plus it has fake transparency for the panel, menus, and titlebars, if you like that sort of thing.

Avoid Enlightenment. E16 is riddled with bugs from using old and bloated code. Configuring it is a nightmare in my experience. It was Beryl before Beryl was Beryl: promoting features and wow-factor over stability and quality code. E17 is also riddled with bugs, but this time it's because it's in early alpha (and always will be, from the looks of things).

I personally prefer a tiling window manager. Currently I'm on dwm, but Ion and wmii are better choices for those not used to this sort of WM. You might want to check out Ratpoison, it's basically screen (you do use screen, right?) for X.

Stalwart · 2007-03-01 22:07:51

If you want 200% customizable WM - try FVWM or metisse (FVWM with composite stuff)

dtjohnst · 2007-03-01 23:25:30

I've never heard of FVWM before, but it looks pretty sick. I'm definately going to try that one. Thanks.

Any other suggestions I should try?

dolby · 2007-03-01 23:31:48

try searching the wiki

ar2k7 · 2007-03-02 00:41:44

Why not try them all, then decide, there are many good ones out there...

skymt, e16 may not be "quality" code enough for you but it runs very stable here, configuring it isn't that bad and it has some useful window managing features that some of the boxes lack.

Last edited by ar2k7 (2007-03-02 01:02:51)

skymt · 2007-03-02 01:17:16

ar2k7 wrote:

skymt, e16 may not be "quality" code enough for you but it runs very stable here, configuring it isn't that bad and it has some useful window managing features that some of the boxes lack.

Really? Well, I'm glad it works for you. Last time I tried it (~1 year ago), it frequently forgot settings. Something as simple as setting a desktop background was needlessly complex. And, of course, it crashed.

It does look nice, and the iconbox and the live pager are attractive features, but the user experience is pretty bad (at least for this user).

phrakture · 2007-03-02 04:18:36

And if you want to get crazy, you can jump into the window managers that actually manage windows - wmii, dwm, stumpwm, ratpoison, evilwm, etc

SleepingGiant08 · 2007-03-02 13:31:06

Stalwart wrote:

If you want 200% customizable WM - try FVWM or metisse (FVWM with composite stuff)

Yup...use FVWM if what complete control over your customization of your desktop. You can make it exactly what you want, although you can pretty much do that with any WM.

phrakture wrote:

And if you want to get crazy, you can jump into the window managers that actually manage windows - wmii, dwm, stumpwm, ratpoison, evilwm, etc

Agreed, Once you are comfortable with DMs and whatnot, you should give wmii or dwm a whirl.

Last edited by SleepingGiant08 (2007-03-02 13:33:32)

ar2k7 · 2007-03-02 14:34:31

skymt wrote:

ar2k7 wrote:
skymt, e16 may not be "quality" code enough for you but it runs very stable here, configuring it isn't that bad and it has some useful window managing features that some of the boxes lack.
Really? Well, I'm glad it works for you. Last time I tried it (~1 year ago), it frequently forgot settings. Something as simple as setting a desktop background was needlessly complex. And, of course, it crashed.
It does look nice, and the iconbox and the live pager are attractive features, but the user experience is pretty bad (at least for this user).

Setting e16 desktop backround is a really obscure and complex procedure, but it can be summed up with put your wallpapers (or symlink) in the backgrounds directory and they will automatically appear as thumbnails in the menu. Don't know exactly what bugs you are referring to but hopefully most of them have been squashed in current or earlier versions. e16 is more than looks and speed, it also has many useful features, how useful depends as always on how you wish to use your desktop and what you want out of your desktop experience, but there's no need to bash E here.

mucknert · 2007-03-03 07:51:55

Traditionalists prefer WindowMaker.

Marcel- · 2007-03-03 13:01:53

IceWM is my favorite! Nice, easy to configure and very lightweight and stable.

Lontronics · 2007-03-03 16:15:30

I am using twm for about half a year now.

Simple, fast, stable and supplied standard with X.

The only thing you have to do is a little script work to make it look nice.

I even have desktop switching, transparent clock and background images integrated in twm

http://www.lontronics.nl/index.php?m=0011

Here a ZW screenshot where I am using twm:

(1920x1200px, 168kb)

I have also used other window managers like KDE, Gnome, Icewm, Openbox, Fluxbox, Ede, Xfce, etc.... but I do like the simplicity of TWM. And it is already installed with X

Jan

Last edited by Lontronics (2007-03-03 16:53:36)

codemac · 2007-03-03 20:35:56

phrakture wrote:

And if you want to get crazy, you can jump into the window managers that actually manage windows - wmii, dwm, stumpwm, ratpoison, evilwm, etc

lolz, all copy cats of ion

skymt · 2007-03-03 21:57:15

codemac wrote:

phrakture wrote:
And if you want to get crazy, you can jump into the window managers that actually manage windows - wmii, dwm, stumpwm, ratpoison, evilwm, etc
lolz, all copy cats of ion :P

$ diff ion dwm
< pointless empty window frames # more work manually managing windows
< configuration in Lua # semi-obscure
< unusable default keybindings # mixes Vi, emacs, screen and Windows paradigms
---
> frames resize automatically to fit the windows onscreen # less work
> configuration in C # you *do* know C, right? ;-)
> fantastic default keybindings # mostly from the Vi camp, which I like

Spadearcher · 2007-03-05 01:12:58

I have just come to Arch Linux, but I've tried and am using a number of window managers on the other distros currently on my harddrive. FVWM is a real pleasure with great configuration options, both within itself and also in its related FVWM-themes and FVWM-crystal versions. And the FVWM forum is a great forum source for assistance. But I am also enjoying Enlightenment, even though I agree that installing backgrounds can be (probably unduly) intricate. But that intricacy (and difficulty) can't hold a candle to what one encounters in attempting to incorporate and utilize Eterm along with it. I have found the successful installation of Eterm backgrounds and themes to be just this side of being unattainable -- and almost not worth the effort when an intuitive break-though has ultimately been achieved. But if you can get Enlightenment and Eterm working together, then you have a very nice window manager indeed. But be warned, the Enlightenment forum is a desert. Expect no nutritive assistance there!

ar2k7 · 2007-03-05 21:49:27

Sure, with active forums there's no need to read any documentation, even how good it is.

Spadearcher · 2007-03-06 00:55:51

Not to unduly prolong this discussion beyond usefulness, I will clarify that while I don't think much of the Enlightenment forum, its documentation is pretty good, i.e., it doesn't appear to have any serious errors or ommisions that I have come across. However, there is no Eterm forum and its documentation is seriously scant, misleading and/or out of date. With Eterm, you're pretty much on you own, riding by the seat of your pants. Which I suppose can be regarded as good exercise for Linux users.

skale · 2007-03-06 04:10:45

Try using ROX (the desktop) It took a week or so to get used to, and it doesn't look very pretty at all (I guess you can fix that, I haven't bothered). However, using ROX I finish things in 20% less time, and I have had no hassles whatsoever. I could sing praises for it all day, but I'll leave some surprises for you.

Spadearcher · 2007-03-06 04:29:07

Skale: I actually have both Rox and Nautilus installed on all my distros, and I do agree that Rox is very useful. (I need Nautilus also in order to to view images, which I don't think that Rox does.) I like Eterm over Xterm (mostly) because I can get backgrounds in the Eterm windows -- but setting it up to do so is not easy. Thanks for your comments.

dtjohnst · 2007-03-06 08:35:31

Holy cow, a guy goes away for a week and his thread explodes. Lots of good suggestions here. So many to try. :S e16, xfce and fvwm have all been installed while I was on the road. Some more suggestions in here I gotta try. Thanks for the suggestions. Feel free to keep 'em coming if you want to rep something that hasn't been mentioned yet.

bneate · 2007-03-06 19:20:58

Well I just thought I should add my opinion. I have been using E17 for the past year and a half and it has been very stable for me. There is the occasional crash but most of the time this is easily recovered from and extremely rarely requires a restart of any applications or X, most of the time all you have to do is click F1 to restart E17 (this doesn't close any running applications). Also E17 is very fast and has some impressive eye candy...I just love all the animations of the default theme. I will agree that E17 is changing a lot right now and sometimes when you upgrade you do need to reconfigure everything but this usually doesn't take very long as the configuration menus are very easy to use and well layed out.

In short I would recommend giving E17 a try and if you like it the minor annoyances of it being under heavy development are totally worth it. I have tried out a lot of different wm's and cannot find anything that even comes close to E17 for me.

iBertus · 2007-03-06 19:26:45

Fvwm++

skale · 2007-03-06 21:04:14

Spadearcher wrote:

Skale: I actually have both Rox and Nautilus installed on all my distros, and I do agree that Rox is very useful. (I need Nautilus also in order to to view images, which I don't think that Rox does.) I like Eterm over Xterm (mostly) because I can get backgrounds in the Eterm windows -- but setting it up to do so is not easy. Thanks for your comments.

It's just a checkbox in Options --> Thumbnails (or Filer windows --> Thumbnails).

Last edited by skale (2007-03-06 21:04:30)

Spadearcher · 2007-03-06 21:08:12

Skale: Thanks. I'll give it a try.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-03-01 21:10:34

New to Arch, need WM advice

#2 2007-03-01 22:02:12

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#3 2007-03-01 22:07:51

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#4 2007-03-01 23:25:30

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#5 2007-03-01 23:31:48

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#6 2007-03-02 00:41:44

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#7 2007-03-02 01:17:16

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#8 2007-03-02 04:18:36

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#9 2007-03-02 13:31:06

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#10 2007-03-02 14:34:31

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#11 2007-03-03 07:51:55

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#12 2007-03-03 13:01:53

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#13 2007-03-03 16:15:30

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#14 2007-03-03 20:35:56

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#15 2007-03-03 21:57:15

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#16 2007-03-05 01:12:58

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#17 2007-03-05 21:49:27

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#18 2007-03-06 00:55:51

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#19 2007-03-06 04:10:45

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#20 2007-03-06 04:29:07

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#21 2007-03-06 08:35:31

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#22 2007-03-06 19:20:58

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#23 2007-03-06 19:26:45

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#24 2007-03-06 21:04:14

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

#25 2007-03-06 21:08:12

Re: New to Arch, need WM advice

Board footer