On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 07:30:07AM -0700, Marc Shapiro wrote: > Chris Bannister wrote: > > >On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:26:13AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > > > >>drifting OT, but to help improve your "snappiness" try some of the > >>lightwieght WM's (like IceWM) or a tiled one like WMII which I'm really > >>starting to like. > >> > >> > > > >Or even fvwm. Check it out - very lightweight - very configurable. > >Checkout some of the screenshots at http://www.fvwm.org/ - very nice! > > > > > > > I'll second fvwm. I have been using it ever since I started with Linux > and Debian (somewhere around Bo, or Hamm, on a 12 MB 486 box, IIRC). I > have briefly looked at others when someone has recommended a wm that > sounds interesting, but it has ALWAYS been BRIEFLY. I come right back > to fvwm. It is small, lightweight and configurable. I don't need icons > on the desktop, they just get in the way, but I have read that even that > is possible. > > NOTE: I am now running a box with an Athlon K7 2400+ and 1.25 GB of > memory and I am still quite happy with fvwm.
I used to use fvwm myself, then changed to WindowMaker. One of the main
things I liked about wmaker was the 'snapping' feature where windows
glue themselves together when you move them next to each other. Do I
make any sense? If yes, is there such a feature available in
fvwm? Last time I watched I didn't find anything...
Cheers
Andreas
>
> --
> Marc Shapiro
>
> No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow.
> What?! Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here.
> Boom. Sooner or later ... boom!
>
> - Susan Ivanova: B5 - Grail
>
>
--
Andreas Rippl -- GPG messages preferred
Key-ID: 0x81073379
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
