Re: tlug: X resolution / color depth

["Scott H. Perlman" <perlman@example.com>]

Jonathan Byrne--3Web wrote:
> Perhaps it needs to be.  There might need to be some evolution in X to make
> that more doable (gee, I keep biting off bigger and bigger chunks :-)  ).  I
> agree that all of the different Window managers that are out there make this

Window management configuration is a religous war.  olwm
vs. mwm. vs. *twm...  Still It would have to be voluntary, and i
personally like the idea of adding a directory where we store a set of
defaults, and modify those.  Perhaps as one long menu, so a default
wm on the system could #include it, but it wouldn't have to go fin /
-name .twmrc....  The problem with autoconfiguration on a multi-user
system is that we either configure Installer Only, Default Somewhere,
or Everyone.  I think the middle option is the way to go.

> I've never used CDE.  What do you hate about it?  I've also never used (or
> seen) ctwm.  What do you like about it?

Its very slow.  It requires the use of icons on the desktop, (I prefer
twm style icon managers) and it is far to "ready-made" you can7t really
wholesale rewrite your configuration.  Getting all my hot keys and such
programmed in is a major pain.

ctwm is basically a twm clone with multiple window support.  Not like
fvwm, or tvtwm where you have one window that is n times screen
resolution, but you hvae n (up to 32) different screens the same size
as each other, that don't intersect.  It also has a bit more polish
than twm.

Re "Configurable vs. Manual":
Yes Linux takes some tough configuration to get things the way you
want it.  However too much automation, makes it impossible to customize
it well.  When the Window Manager has hard-coded defaults and menus to
make it easier for a new user to use and get used to, it makes it that
much harder or impossible for the old experienced hack to get the way
he/she wants it.

Thats why I don't want anything touching my files.  I work hard to get
them right.  Its why I like ctwm, it doesn7t have all the bells and
whistles, but I can tell it EXACTLY what i want it to do.  Rather than
automating everything at install time, I think what we need is a default
list of installed somewhere. (Maintained by root, but relatively trivial,
a file that has format:
"Package Name" "binary" "Package Description"
And then WM tooks to look at your WM configuration easily and instert
them automatically.

But anytime you take away the ability to really customize EVERYTHING or
to get at things via vi and change files, you lose some of the really
technical hacks, which are what keep Linux developing as fast as it is.

> >The first thing to be judged must be the standards of Judgement!
> 
> I like that!

Thanks!

-Scott
(All writings my opinion only, Warning, I am apt to go off into advocacy
wars on *nix topics with little or no provocation.)

-- 
The Past Wasn't    | 
The Present Isn't  | This space unintentionally left blank.
The Future Won't   |
 Scott H. perlman@example.com  
---------------------------------------------------------------
Next TLUG Meeting: 11 April Sat, Tokyo Station Yaesu gate 12:30
Featuring Tague Griffith of Netscape i18n talking on source code
---------------------------------------------------------------
a word from the sponsor:
TWICS - Japan's First Public-Access Internet System
www.twics.com  info@example.com  Tel:03-3351-5977  Fax:03-3353-6096