From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Oct 31 07:47:46 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA15615 for chat-outgoing; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:47:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15607 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:47:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.v-site.net [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA04873; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:47:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199710311547.HAA04873@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: John Fieber cc: Stephane Raimbault , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Prefered X Window Manager? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 31 Oct 1997 09:36:24 EST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:47:19 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I think the multimedia types will prefer "Elightenment" 8) Cheers, Amancio > On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Stephane Raimbault wrote: > > > So, I'm just wondering what Window Manager some of you use. I am currently > > using twm which comes with XFree86. > > I'm using qvwm at the moment. It offers a more faithful > win95-style interface than fvwm95. It is also one of the few not > derived from twm or fvwm and despite being written in C++ it is > actually smaller than any of the fvwm derivatives I've tried. > Also, not be a hacked version of a hacked version of a hacked > version of twm, the source code is quite clear should you want to > look at it. > > Once or twice a month it blows up on me but my xsession falls > back to mwm when that happens. (Interesting challenge: can > anyone find a window manager that consumes MORE memory, or has > FASTER memory leaks than mwm?) > > -john >