On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 02:12:07PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > The default theme for fvwm includes a big box that appears in the lower > right hand corner of the screen. Is there a name for that whole thing? > If so, and if someone would be kind enough to tell me what it is, then > I'll know what to call it in future.
Use FvwmIdent or xprop to find out. > Anyway, that wide but not very tall box includes several different parts: > > 1) A part where all of the current open windows are listed by name (and > each name is clickable) FvwmIconMan > 2) A square part consisting of a sort of map, divided into four quadrants > that shows you whar part of your four-part virtual desktop you > are currently actually looking at. FvwmPager > For me, 3c was in fact just a blank space. I just now figured out why. On > FreeBSD, the xload command is in a separate package, all on its own, and that > package is *not* currently listed as dependency of the fvwm package. (I will > be speakingt o the maintainer about this.) As a result, my system was running No sane maintainer is going to make xload a dependency of FVWM. The point of the default config here isn't to do that, but to provide some sane defaults where possible. > In any case, I would like to suggest to the fvwm maintainers that they do as > I have done and substitute out the xload invocation in the default theme and > replace it, as I have done, with a digital xclock display of the current date. No. I think what you've done is to prove the point -- that being that you're expected to use this config as a starting to point to make your own modifications, which you're doing. > I would really appreciate it if the maintainers would fix this self-evident > bug. It is most annoying. The minimization/iconization process should not > be hiding minimized window icons underneath the boxes created by the default > theme. That's just wrong, and one would hope that there might be some simple > way to get the window minimization/iconization process to avoid doing this > annoying and clearly wrong thing. This isn't a bug. Thanks, Thomas
