|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
john maclean
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 9:56 am Post subject: |
 |
|
One additional reason why I use fluxbox. Tools do not rely on NetworkManager for anything, they just work. I've also seen this "I need networkmanager to work" issue and I just got rid of gnome.
|
_________________
BLAG 'em up! |
|
 |
extraspecialbitter
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder if fluxbox would be a good window manager for freeeee?
|
|
|
|
jebba
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| extraspecialbitter wrote: | | I wonder if fluxbox would be a good window manager for freeeee? |
I dont see any advantages that fluxbox brings over openbox though. I'm not saying they exist I just dont know what they are. Fluxbox, openbox, and blackbox are all pretty similar. Seems openbox has the most active development of the three.
|
|
|
|
john maclean
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree on that. The boxes are very similar. In fact, the flux is the only "box" that I have tried! In any case from what I have read alot of the scripts and keybindings work on all of them.
May even try another box tonight.
|
_________________
BLAG 'em up! |
|
|
extraspecialbitter
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know that at one point we were looking at alternatives to openbox, although I must admit that after getting used to it I actually prefer it over gnome. I've only tried Xfce a few times and can't tell whether or not it would be a good solution. dyne:bolic uses WindowMaker, si? Just throwing out ideas here - I'm content to stick with openbox on the freeeee platform, and appreciate the exposure to a new desktop environment.
|
|
|
|
john maclean
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
XFCE is very easy to reconfigure. I find it easier to use and "get under the hood" to change stuff. The boxes will always be smaller and faster though.
|
_________________
BLAG 'em up! |
|
|
|
|
|
