(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

With virtually dozens & dozens of window managers available, how do we pick the right one? Whether you are looking for speed or flare, there is surely a window manager to meet your needs. However, I am trying to investigate what the collective favorite window manager is that way it may be included in Pupbuntu (official release date set for 2-14-2010.) I am looking for the blunt input of the community.

Pupbuntu is going to be geared towards the low-end of the spectrum and will be capable of running on a 133MHz PC (or so we hope.) So I am leaning towards JWM right now set in front of the XFCE4 desktop. However, I am just trying to figure out what the general public wants to see. Please feel free to select your favorite window manager (and if you don't see yours feel free to leave a comment.) Thank you so much for your cooperation in helping us design a better product for the Linux community.


Ronald L. Harsh

The general public wants choices! Make it easy to switch.

My favorite: Flwm. Get it here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=47192

jemimah wrote:The general public wants choices! Make it easy to switch.
My favorite: Flwm. Get it here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=47192

We are trying to make it easier to switch your Window Manager. We are going to include the top three window managers (as to be determined by this survey) built in to our system. They will be easier to change by simply using the login window and choosing what type of system you want to use. Thank you for your input, it is very much appreciated. and I will surely check out flwm.

Note: To all the FLWM users please PM or post here with your vote as I cannot add it to the poll survey! And thanks to our friend for suggesting it!

Choice is good, but I think the general public also wants a capable, reliable and easy to use default... and obviously for Puppy it has to be lightweight

and will be capable of running on a 133MHz PC (or so we hope.)

If you are aiming at really old machines like that you should forget things like xfce and openbox, and choose something with really minimal ram usage, like jwm. In fact I'd consider making a custom jwm build, with support for some of the optional libraries disabled.

So I am leaning towards JWM right now set in front of the XFCE4 desktop.

IMNAAHO the only possible reason for running xfce with its memory hogging libraries is to use its window manager and panel, which seem to be reliable and nice enough to use, and actually have decent support for EWMH... e.g. utility windows. Why on earth would you want to run it without them? For Thunar? You do know that you can have Thunar without xfce, don't you?

BTW, do you know that forum surveys are pretty much meaningless?
Plenty of people can probably tell you the most popular WMs (which could actually just be a reflection of which ones have the most publicity, not which ones are best). - I suspect JWM and Icewm are most popular, and possibly xfce, due to the NOP puplet. I think if I were choosing three to put in a puplet it would be them, too. XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments, and AFAIK there are no lightweight alternatives that support utility window hints and stuff.

I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox, it needs dbus, plus thunar, plus, panel, gui, it has a lot of deps. actually if you want lite, think gtk1, gtk1 rox is much faster than gtk2, gtk2+glib2 has many deps, for a 133 to work fast and stable, I would ditch gtk2, you can even download the latest Seamonkey compiled as gtk1.

Results GTK1.2 Deps
# ldd /libgtk-1.2.so.0
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgmodule-1.2.so.0 => not found
libglib-1.2.so.0 => not found
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb76ed000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb76e0000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb76d3000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb75d6000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb75ae000)
libgdk-1.2.so.0 => not found
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb746d000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb77e5000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb7458000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb7455000)

Results GTK2.0 Deps
# ldd libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.1600.1
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb731c000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0xb7319000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb730d000)
libXcursor.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcursor.so.1 (0xb7305000)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0xb72f0000)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 (0xb72e7000)
libXcomposite.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcomposite.so.1 (0xb72e4000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb72d7000)
libXdamage.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdamage.so.1 (0xb72d4000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0xb72ce000)
libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0xb72b7000)
libcairo.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2 (0xb725e000)
libpixman-1.so.0 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libpixman-1.so.0 (0xb7213000)
libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 (0xb71f6000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0xb71ed000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb70f0000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb70ed000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb70e8000)
libgio-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgio-2.0.so.0 (0xb7086000)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0xb706b000)
libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0xb7037000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0xb700f000)
libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0xb6faa000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb6f9a000)
libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0xb6f7d000)
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f5a000)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f57000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb6f53000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xb6eb2000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb6e8a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb6d4a000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0xb6c60000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0xb6c59000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb6c44000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0xb6c30000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7711000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb6c22000)
ttuuxxx

Ttuuxxx wrote:I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox

Is that in response to this?

disciple wrote:XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments

Of course XFCE is much heavier than jwm + rox (or similar). That's what I was saying - it is much heavier and therefore not good for old hardware. It is lighter than other desktop environments - KDE and Gnome.

Well actually I am working on a rebuild of JWM. Personally I am making the XFCE4 system only as an alternative build (it's not going to be in the lightweight distro.) I currently use OpenBox+LPanel right now on the system I'm on (and I like it.) I am not trying to make the main distro heavy or anything like that (I personally feel its a little ridiculous to make puppy w/XFCE4 and load it with bloatware which makes it 600+MB.) Puppy was designed to be fast and I do agree the full XFCE4 would surely slow my distro down. But different strokes for different folks eh'? I like the way a nice simple WM operates (without hogging all of the resources,) I mean after all that is kind of the whole point of why puppy is here. Thank you disciple for all of the technical specs and input, it just seems that choosing three or four WM to include is a tough one to pull of (if you intend to keep the users happy.)

I love XFCE4 & KDA, hell even GNome. However, I do not think that the general public wants a distro built around these (using puppy anyways.) I do however plan to build a KDE & Gnome alternative though for those daring enough to use it! I really like the OpenBox so I am thinking that along with LPanel will be the defaulted WM, and the user can always use my simple application to choose another WM of their liking.

Thank you all for the great tips and advice that you are giving. You are all really shedding some light on my wonderful dilemma.

disciple wrote:

Ttuuxxx wrote:I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox

Is that in response to this?

disciple wrote:XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments

Of course XFCE is much heavier than jwm + rox (or similar). That's what I was saying - it is much heavier and therefore not good for old hardware. It is lighter than other desktop environments - KDE and Gnome.

Ok if you put it that way:)
what about? http://equinox-project.org/ I've compiled it in the past, its small and lite.
ttuuxxx

ttuuxxx wrote: ...
Results GTK2.0 Deps
# ldd libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.1600.1
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb731c000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0xb7319000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb730d000)
libXcursor.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcursor.so.1 (0xb7305000)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0xb72f0000)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 (0xb72e7000)
libXcomposite.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcomposite.so.1 (0xb72e4000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb72d7000)
libXdamage.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdamage.so.1 (0xb72d4000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0xb72ce000)
libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0xb72b7000)
libcairo.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2 (0xb725e000)
libpixman-1.so.0 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libpixman-1.so.0 (0xb7213000)
libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 (0xb71f6000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0xb71ed000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb70f0000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb70ed000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb70e8000)
libgio-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgio-2.0.so.0 (0xb7086000)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0xb706b000)
libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0xb7037000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0xb700f000)
libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0xb6faa000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb6f9a000)
libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0xb6f7d000)
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f5a000)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f57000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb6f53000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xb6eb2000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb6e8a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb6d4a000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0xb6c60000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0xb6c59000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb6c44000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0xb6c30000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7711000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb6c22000)
ttuuxxx

And now that is one hell of a list ttuuxxx! Thanks for those great resources, and this will surely help me in my quest to make yet another little puppy! Oh by the way kind sir, I submit to you a S/S of Pupbuntu running the XFCE4 environment (and let me tell ya' @ 133MHz the load time was less than appealing.)

I'm just a huge sucker for Icewm. Can't live without the command line in the taskbar. If I use other WM, I have to add it as a key combination using Gexec. I like the ease of adding shortcuts, themes, and tweaks but that might just be because I know my way around it.

Sometimes I do use other WMs, but that's just for an occasional change in scenery, or for novelty.

Battleshooter

Yeah, gotta love the simplicity of IceWM, it is truly one of the greats as far as speed, user friendliness and efficiency are concerned!

Drone-87401 wrote:Yeah, gotta love the simplicity of IceWM, it is truly one of the greats as far as speed, user friendliness and efficiency are concerned!

You left one out, the most important, The lite themes, :)In the past I made so revolutionary themes for it the largest was 20kb extract because I used system links on one main theme and reused images http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/dis ... 402-v9.pet came with 5 custom themes, a shutdown script, xdg template, blinky, freememory applet, absvolume, parcellite, refresh menus, ttuuxxxview, libImlib2, icewm, and it was 611kb, 100kb smaller than the main repo's icewm. It took a lot of work to get that one so small, but the end result was really impressive. lol
ttuuxxx

Light window managers benchmarked here not too long ago. I think the only widely used ones are JWM and Icewm... I compared some of the popular window managers myself a while back and concluded that Openbox + Lxpanel wasn't really light, which will be why they didn't include it.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... h&id=22500

Ttuuxxx wrote:what about? http://equinox-project.org/ I've compiled it in the past, its small and lite.

Yes, I tend to ignore others like it because development is so slow and I can't find any particular reason to use them rather than a combination of apps like JWM and rox.

Good link: http://equinox-project.org that looks promising. Perhaps I'll giver 'er a go later on and see what that's all about. It looks a lot like JWM, perhaps if it is indeed lighter and just as good - it might be something to run with. 20Kb theme? That's incredible! Very light-weight indeed. Nah, I just use the OpenBox + Lxpanel because I like it - truth be told there are many, many more WM that I'm sure we might be overlooking, it's gonna take some time (that's for sure.)

So do ya'll gents say that rox is the lightest (whilst maintaining good usability) file manager? Was thinking of Thunar but damn, that's slow lol.

I suspect there are much lighter file managers that are good and useable... just not as good as Rox
Maybe the tree file manager that Puppy used to include?

openbox is very STABLE( no problems with full screen gxine for example) and fast ( + have a gui to configure)
I use it with fbpanel or lxpanel

also xfce4( not only a wm) is one of my choice ( xfwm4 themes and panel is the most cutomizable panel) even on eee pc( with iconbox plugin)
also with fbpanel or xfce4 panel you have unified look with gtk theme you choose
openbox and xfwm4 - no problems with unicode

as for speed - look at NOP and Boxpup created by Gray

E17 has no system tray ( needed by blinky or skype), so you have to use trayer

Fluxbox here, but I doubt you want it as default wm. It's both lightweight, usable and styleable, many distros make their light versions using it or include it as second choice.

For something called "Pupbuntu" your best choice would be probably xfce

I don't like thunar, Really if we were making a puppy official release, I would go with Rox/Xfce combo, I like the look and apps of Xfce but hate thunar, Rox I think is 10 times better for the seasoned puppy user.

i think it's possible to use just xfwm4 and panel with/rox ( though now application menu on right click) desktop without thunar
maybe it's possible to find out what files can be ommited from xfce4 pet
i did not test yet but think that transparency might also work

only you need to set up icon theme in gtkrc.mine to see icons in xfce4 panel menu or to cahnge puppy menu files a bit ( add fullpaths to icons

.xinitrc autostarts xfpanel if xfwm4 runs