fastest & lightest window-manager ?

[alie]

please give me your opinion and suggestion about which one is the fastest or lightest WM ? �e

-Alie
www.alietan.com

[vermaden]

The fastest one is TinyWM for sure (50 lines of C code):
http://incise.org/tinywm.html

But for day to day work you would want one of these: pekwm | fluxbox | openbox

openbox is least featured from these three, fluxbox also has a integrated panel but has less option the pekwm, both theming and functional.

[graudeejs]

TWM and the next small thing is FVWM (very flexible, fast + small)
Lot's of VM's are based on FVWM code

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fvwm

you can btw, download my config (and/or see my screenshots) from my homepage

[UNIXgod]

ratpoison

[ephemera]

It's xfce4 for me ... not the lightest or fastest but it has almost all of the Gnome look and functionality that I care about minus the bloat.

[alik]

The fastest one is TinyWM for sure (50 lines of C code):
http://incise.org/tinywm.html


Wow, great WM (well, as you said, not for everyday use ;)), thanks for link

[DemoDoG]

That seems to be a good foundation for starting develop a very own window manager :-) Wouldn´t it be great to have a FreeBSD-wm with graphics and menues designed for freebsd-use only :-)

[alik]

That seems to be a good foundation for starting develop a very own window manager :-) Wouldn´t it be great to have a FreeBSD-wm with graphics and menues designed for freebsd-use only :-)

it is no hard to imagine:

user A: I want KDE-like FreeBSD wm
user B: I wank GNOME-like FreeBSD wm
user C: I want XFCE-like FreeBSD wm (it is me)
user D: I want Fluxbox-like FreeBSD wm
and all other flavours

:P

[DemoDoG]

I can see that happening :-)

[aragon]

Good suggestions here. In case you want more than just a window manager, take a look at XFCE - it's a very lightweight desktop environment.

[Carpetsmoker]

I don't think you can really notice the difference in speed between most of the "light window managers" such as tiny, fluxbox, twm, fvwm, etc. on any reasonably modern computer (2GHz/512MB or better), the difference would measured in microseconds if not faster ... To fast for any human to notice.

I use PekWM (with stalonetray), it's fast, stable, configurable.

[Oko]

I think the smallest really usable wm is dwm which has less than 2000 lines of code. I as lots of OpenBSD people use OpenBSD version of CWM (calm window manager) which is recently ported to FreeBSD. For more standard really light window manager I suggest JWM (Joe's own window manager) used by DSL for instance. The most comprehensive list of WM

http://xwinman.org/others.php

Bare in mind that the size of WM is not all that matters. It is
also very important to check the size of dependencies.
For instance JWM has no dependencies beyond X libraries.
Somebody was comparing dependencies and resource consumption for
most popular minimalistic WM but I do not remember the link and
I could not find it with Google.

The another thind to take into account is if the WM is present in base or not.
I use CWM because it is in the base of OpenBSD and I like it better than FVWM and TWM which are also in the base.

In some sense TWM is probably best choice for WM because it comes with
X window system and it is available on all Unix like systems which run X window system. The same goes for instance for ed (editor) since it is only
editor which is present on all Unix like systems.

[hydra]

If you want a small (and usable !) WM, try Fluxbox.

[cloud]

Personaly I use Wmii which is very light and ergonomic. It permit to be very fast and permit to manipulate the wm without mouse. I have used fluxbox for a long time but now I'm a Wmii addict :)
In the same spirit, there is Awesome which is a great wm.

[trev]

I started with twm on Coherent Unix, and have never really felt the need to substitute another (though some years ago I did try every wm in the ports tree just for fun).

[Philippe-Pierre]

Hi all and happy new year,

DWM is extremely light and extremely powerful, manages windows in both modes (tiled and floating), has _a lot_ of features and is stable as a rock.
http://www.suckless.org/dwm/


As for classic WMs, "Fluxbox style" but even more powerful, I recommend PekWM.
http://pekwm.org/projects/pekwm

[xteraco]

This is a very interesting thread. I don't think I saw one mention of BlackBox. I had a 700mhz web server that I felt needed a WM. I used Torsmo to monitor usage and found that Blackbox was perfect. I don't remember all that I compared it with but it is VERY fast.

Up to about 2 weeks ago, on modern machines I have been using blackbox as well. I like how simple it is. Now for added flexibility I am using Fluxbox. Fluxbox seems to be very light weight as well. I have not compared Fluxbox resource usage to anything though.

Oh, I think Blackbox was originally written for BSD to! So they probably play well together. ;)

Hope this helps!

[estrabd]

This is a very interesting thread. I don't think I saw one mention of BlackBox. I had a 700mhz web server that I felt needed a WM. I used Torsmo to monitor usage and found that Blackbox was perfect. I don't remember all that I compared it with but it is VERY fast.

Up to about 2 weeks ago, on modern machines I have been using blackbox as well. I like how simple it is. Now for added flexibility I am using Fluxbox. Fluxbox seems to be very light weight as well. I have not compared Fluxbox resource usage to anything though.

Oh, I think Blackbox was originally written for BSD to! So they probably play well together. ;)

Hope this helps!

Didn't fluxbox come from blackbox? I also like to play around with xmonad from time to time.

[hydra]

Yes, fluxbox has emerged from blackbox, just tried blackbox, looks really nice, but is it possible to switch virtual screens like in fluxbox ?

[subhacom]

I found the memory foot print of evilwm to be one of the smallest ( less than 300 KB, which is even smaller than fvwm, fluxbox, awesome and most of their derivatives ). And it is very usable with full keyboard control as well as mouse control. But the controls are hard-coded, so it may not be usable for some people (as the man page points out). I found Ratpoison to be pretty good, but I need a mouse while using firefox ( navigating to a url using keyboard is painful when there are many of them in a page).

hth
subhacom

[kasse]

What are peoples opinions about Xmonad?

[ArchGh0ul]

What are peoples opinions about Xmonad?

Great in terms of modularity.
Not what I could call the most lightweight though.

1. I would suggest Evilwm if lightweight is what you need. Plus the fullscreen option makes it a nice WM. Combine that with multiple desktops and you got yourself the most lightweight WM you could ever have. To make it even smaller (while removing some things) you can edit the makefile and disable info showing and multiple screens (and some other stuff aswell)
2. For tiling WM's I'd go with DWM or with LarsWM(I use larswm)
3. Fluxbox for a normal desktop

[tangram]

I used xmonad for a couple of months.

Very modular in fact imho it's the most flexible window manager I've came across. Loads of contrib modules for pretty much anything.

On the downside it does have ghc as a dependency.

Give it a go especially if you like tiling window managers.

[Gambler]

A slightly different, but similar question: which desktop environments are fairly fast and configurable from GUI at the same time?

I use XFCE right now, but I'm looking for alternatives just to have some choice.

[jb_fvwm2]

easier to download, say, a pre-written fvwm2rc from
somewhere than to install a WM and configure it from
scratch. (that is an alternative, not specifically what
you asked in your question). I usually find a few and
test each one, and one or two of the larger ones already
incorporate the learning curve and configuration.

[ArchGh0ul]

A slightly different, but similar question: which desktop environments are fairly fast and configurable from GUI at the same time?

I use XFCE right now, but I'm looking for alternatives just to have some choice.

WindowMaker + wmakerconf + some dockapps could be what you're looking for

[fronclynne]

evilwm, except that the default keybindings overlap with qemu.
blackbox, except that it doesn't seem to like virtual screens larger than the physical screen.
twm is nice and simple and ugly.

[graudeejs]

fvwm, can do all that (including overlapping key bindings with qemu and virtual screens larger than monitor) ;)
nothing can beat it's flexibility

[nuintari]

I can't believe no one has mentioned pwm yet. Small, simple, easy to customize, efficient with desktop real estate, has tabs that rock.

[simjoko]

How's about awesome?

[simjoko]

oh, I just saw cloud mentioned it. sry.

[rghq]

Afterstep or CTWM here - sometimes Fvwm :)

[Markand]

Pekwm :)

I tried fluxbox and openbox, the first one fluxbox is easy to configure and got a small toolbar useful but the syntax configuration is freak sometime. Openbox is small and got gtk like tools for configuring it, all of the configuration is in xml which is the uglier language for configuration files (i.e hal)

So I tried pekwm and the syntax is so great, the documentation too and really easy to understand :)

[vermaden]

Pekwm :)

I tried fluxbox and openbox, the first one fluxbox is easy to configure and got a small toolbar useful but the syntax configuration is freak sometime. Openbox is small and got gtk like tools for configuring it, all of the configuration is in xml which is the uglier language for configuration files (i.e hal)

So I tried pekwm and the syntax is so great, the documentation too and really easy to understand :)

PekWM is indeed great, is cleaner and simpler then fluxbox or openbox (xml ...), but if you need gtk2 tools, there also exist gtk2 tools for fluxbox, like fluxmenu, fluxconf, ...

[pradtf]

i tried xfce, kde, gnome, fluxbox, icewm, fvwm, but then went to the tiled ones. i liked ion for several months, but then settled on dwm which i've been using for the better part of a year.

i think there are 2 issues when choosing a wm:
1. does it fit the way you want to work
2. are you going to have to work extra hard to configure it

#2 may be worth it, if #1 is.
for me, dwm let's me do things with minimal effort and didn't take much getting used to either.

[copypaiste]

WindowMaker + wmakerconf + some dockapps could be what you're looking for

Agreed. Very fast and easy to set up. Most dockapps are neat and useful.

[Brandybuck]

Wouldn´t it be great to have a FreeBSD-wm with graphics and menues designed for freebsd-use only :-)

Why not just have FreeBSD themes for existing window managers? Most WMs have theming capabilities. KDE, GNOME, XFCE, Fluxbox, Windowmaker, etc.

[Brandybuck]

A slightly different, but similar question: which desktop environments are fairly fast and configurable from GUI at the same time?

Actual desktops, as opposed to window managers, are few in number. You have KDE, GNOME, XFCE, LXDE, and Enlightenment. Rox and WindowMaker/GNUstep might also count.

I'm a huge KDE fan, I just love it. But it fails the "fairly fast" department. GNOME is the next in line for the speed department, but is not as configurable. Enlightenment is fairly minimal as a desktop, but is snappy, configurable, and lots of eye candy. LXDE is more of a collection of desktop "parts" than an actual desktop, making it very configurable. It's also fast and snappy. You might give it a shot, although there isn't a meta-port for it.

[meeb]

ratpoison (fast), stumpwm (not that fast but in active development) - both tiling

[ossnet]

4 gigs is standard now a days speed shouldn't even be a factor

[tangram]

4 gigs is standard now a days speed shouldn't even be a factor

Speak for yourself ;)

[vermaden]

4 gigs is standard now a days speed shouldn't even be a factor

So that is the reason to write bloated 'n' shited apps for you?

[Carpetsmoker]

4 gigs is standard now a days speed shouldn't even be a factor

This is not true, even with pretty modern hardware there is a significant difference in how fast or sluggish a WM feels.

The best example is probably Windows Vista vs. Windows XP (Or vs. Windows vista classic UI), while benchmarks don't really show a difference in speed, the Windows XP GUI feels much more responsive and faster, and Vista slow and sluggish ... The difference is very little, but it is noticeable.

Aside from this, not everyone is running a i7 with 4GB RAM and a GTX280 ... Some people actually use older hardware.

[ossnet]

Speak for yourself ;)

I'm old old hardware also but I was lookling at getting a new box

any MS OS I always turn off all unnessacary services and startup proccesses that's the number one way to fix a slow windows box

[mwatkins]

dwm - http://dwm.suckless.org/

I'm more of the "I don't want overlapping windows" camp (unless it is absolutely required) and spend most of my day in terminal sessions so dwm - fast, light - is my choice.

awesome I've barely tried but believe it is based on dwm.

[unicyclist]

This may be the wrong place to ask, but would any of you care to share what you have in your menu file?
I would be interested in fvwm, icewm, pekwm.

FWIW, my computer (till I get a new power supply for another one) is 350mhz with 250megs ram. I run FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and Vectorlinux 6.0 light with icewm on them.

[mwatkins]

argv - I'm glad you posted an update on dwm; indeed you can run most (any I've tried) image display utils; gimp works just fine floating. I like the "rules" - having specific apps lauch into specific desktops, with the mode set as appropriate. (most of mine remain tiled)

All that in ~ 2000 lines of C code and precious little memory.

Currently I need to run MSWindows in one of my displays so I run dwm in a Xming session; when I need MSWin less I flip back and run Windows headless.

I rather like the my current config - VirtuaWin gives me desktop paging on Windows; slick little utility almost makes Windows bearable. Perhaps a bit too bearable; I have something of a preference for surfing the web using my FreeBSD box - feels safer - but I rather like Google Chrome and its too darn handy with a Windows desktop always a keystroke away.

[Carpetsmoker]

argv, have you ever noticed the `Enter' key on your keyboard? Using it once every once in a while would make your posts so much more readable. ;)

[jb_fvwm2]

I run a minimalistic window manager, no icons. 4 or so terminals
If I need more I run "Eterm &" in one
...........
Way less time to install a "wow" fvwm2rc from the web (find 7, test all)
than beginning to learn gnome (here)
............
The post above about tuning Windows I somewhat agree with, having
run win98 with two firewalls (learned from bsd) and two antivirus.
Currently not dual-booted due to installed memory greater than
what it used to be. But prior to tuning it, I had persistent BSOD's
and it still won't properly run some things (one very good file
indexer purports to be indexing files but is actually only reading
the titles, the indexes stay stale)
..............

[graudeejs]

This forum is sort of unforgiving. No way to edit or delete posts once you Submit. My mistakes are preserved for eternity.

Until you become member :D

[tangram]

argv little bit of advice... use paragraphs next time ;)

A huge block of text kills the readability even if the post is interesting (I got lost half away through).

Yeah and I agree... changing the slightest thing in config.h is a pain: edit config.h -> uninstall -> reinstall port -> restart X.

[Daisuke_Aramaki]

changing the slightest thing in config.h is a pain: edit config.h -> uninstall -> reinstall port -> restart X.

yeah, thats the thing with dwm, xmonad etc., where one needs to compile after a slight change in the config.

But if you have had experience with dwm before, and know the inner workings and want to use a config say from another system you can always copy the config anywhere and use the DWM_CONF knob to point to your own config instead of the default, say when you are installing even the first time.

Something like this

make DWM_CONF=/path/to/your/config.h install clean

[mwatkins]

changing the slightest thing in config.h is a pain: edit config.h -> uninstall -> reinstall port -> restart X.

No need to restart X.

I don't use the ports version of dwm but instead if I want an update I grab it using hg. Once tweaked, there's very little to change except for the odd new keybinding.... which reminds me I need one of those.

My .xinitrc ends with something like the following:

while true
do
# default dwm status bar sh script (not using)
# $HOME/.dwm/status | dwm >$HOME/dwm.err 2>&1 & DISPLAY=:0.1 dwm
# but am using my own and slightly more interesting python version...
cleanup_dwmstatus
# this is my default dwm, two screens
# $HOME/.dwm/dwmstatus | DISPLAY=:0.1 dwm >$HOME/dwm.err 2>&1 & DISPLAY=:0.0 dwm
# one screen only...
$HOME/.dwm/dwmstatus | dwm >$HOME/dwm.err
# something even simpler if testing or status script broken
#dwm >$HOME/dwm.err
done

Quit the currently running dwm and it'll start up again. Your open windows will be in vdesktop 1 (or whatever your first one is labelled), with the exception of any which had rules - they will be "moved" per the rules.

My workflow is vim /path/to/src/config.h and I run make install from within vim... quick dwm, et voila. I dare say I can make changes in dwm as fast as in say fluxbox.

ps, if I feel like testing another WM I have a line above "done" which calls upon a script called "testwm"; that way I can edit the contents of the script, make chances, put nothing but a comment in there - whatever - but still have a working dwm / shells etc at my disposal if the wm I happen to be looking at fails to work or impress.

[Daisuke_Aramaki]

No need to restart X.
I don't use the ports version of dwm but instead if I want an update I grab it using hg. Once tweaked, there's very little to change except for the odd new keybinding.... which reminds me I need one of those.

I had been thinking something along those lines, but was totally lazy. this is going to be very helpful. thanks

[tangram]

I assumed you had to restart X, but thinking again it's just a window manager and those can be reloaded at will ::doh::

Can you post your cleanup_dwmstatus and dwmstatus?

[DutchDaemon]

registration == membership?

You're listed as 'Just Registered'. It's a "trial period".

You'll have editing privileges after 10 posts && 10 days of membership.

[mwatkins]

tangram: Here's the function in my .xinitrc; just a little cleanup of my status app. dwm used to take redirection from stdin - perhaps it still does but at one major upgrade I did, that seemed to stop working to I rejigged my status bar app to use X and set the bar that way instead.

cleanup_dwmstatus() {
if [ -f $HOME/.dwm/.dwmstatus.pid ]; then
/bin/kill -s INT `cat $HOME/.dwm/.dwmstatus.pid`
rm $HOME/.dwm/.dwmstatus.pid
fi
}

dwmstatus itself produces output like this:

Like Suicide - Soundgarden, Superunknown [:::::: ] [0.00 0.05 0.01] 12:09 PM Wednesday August 09

The attached file is Python; it should run on any version of Python < 3.x provided the X libraries are available. Links to those are available; you don't need to be running mpd.

I realize that one could do most of what this app does with a shell script, indeed I ran one for some time, but it hurt my head to think of creating a "volume bar" in a shell script. I also originally intended to plug in a multiple server monitoring piece but promptly forgot about it... until this thread. Coming soon.

[tangram]

Thanks man. I'll try it when I get home ;)

[graudeejs]

argv, get familiar with
The
http://www.instruction.greenriver.edu/avery/activities/tech/images/Enter_Key.jpg
key

[jb_fvwm2]

xclip is handy for stuff
/some/program | xclip #puts it in the buffer
cat file.txt | xclip #puts the file in the buffer
xclip -o # outputs buffer to terminal
xclip -o | program...
then if you are in, say, webmail and want to
paste the file or results of the command you
can use both of two mouse buttons simultaneously
..........
Hope that is all 100 percent accurate

[DutchDaemon]

xclip or xclipboard?

[jb_fvwm2]

/usr/ports/x11/xclip/
I recently read a guide about it.
Unsure about the other which I also have installed.

[seraphyn]

I like ion3.
Tried a long time other one, but came everytime back to ion.
Greetings

[CodeBlock]

Using AwesomeWM on my desktop- Might try pekwm, seems quite a few people use it here.

Awesome has been pretty decent, now that I've gotten used to tiling.

[ckester]

I'm currently using musca, another one of the tiled window managers. It's a lot like dwm, but you can use ~/.musca_start to reconfig most settings, instead of recompiling.

Musca comes preconfigured to use dmenu.

Unlike awesome, wmii and dwm, it doesn't do the tiled layout automatically. Instead, the user creates and resizes the tiles manually.

OTOH, musca is not as scriptable as awesome. That may or may not be a bad thing, depending on your perspective.

Anyone looking for a tiled window manager that fits somewhere between dwm and awesome on the scales of simplicity and size might want to give musca a try.

[mohman]

I´m new here.
Just to say that I´m trying Gnome, XFCE4,KDE3, KDE4, most of the ´light´ window managers etc...etc... Fluxbox is the best manager I found.
I have nothing but the problems with KDE or GNOME, thought those are desktops only. I prefer KEEP IT SIMPLE, like unix do.
Fluxbox have really simple etc. menu configuration (vs like Gnome, which have compilicated Alacarte<-- buggy shit program)
In *nix You have to do it simple by own hands :)

Thatś all for now.


btw. If you have 16gig mem, 1Tb Hd and lots of time, take of look KDE4.
below that is too slooooow.

[chalbersma]

You're listed as 'Just Registered'. It's a "trial period".

You'll have editing privileges after 10 posts && 10 days of membership.

Don't you ever get tired of answering these questions?

[Aaron_VanAlstine]

The fastest one is TinyWM for sure (50 lines of C code):
http://incise.org/tinywm.html

I hadn't seen TinyWM. Thanks.

[sk8harddiefast]

dwm.Is really fast and ~2000 lines of C code.Have no dependecies.Is simple a source code.You open the config.h file,make colors changes etc and compile the source.And that's it :)

[Stilgart]

I definitely prefer scrotwm over dwm. It is easier to configure (simple configuration file VS compilation) and I find the result more pleasant.

Of course, that is a matter of taste. :-)

[kpedersen]

Hmm,

does anyone know of a window manager that only allows one window per desktop?

I.e imagine dwm, but when I launch firefox on the original fullscreen xterm, it doesnt open it up tiled with xterm, but instead moves it automatically to desktop 2?

I am doing some opengl development and I am not keen on tiling, it moves all the text around in vim as it is resized and kinda gets on my nerves :p

If there is no such thing, is it possible with dwm to launch (e.g another xterm) and specify the dekstop it appears on?

Thanks

[graudeejs]

you can configure fvwm to do that

another thing of fvwm that you will probably like is FvwmRearange module, that (when called) dynamically rearranges windows on the current desk, so that not window is covered by other (I used it A LOT)

[kpedersen]

whilst fvwm can pretty much do everything, I would rather even navigate through a .h file rather than get involved in fvwm configuration :p

[graudeejs]

whilst fvwm can pretty much do everything, I would rather even navigate through a .h file rather than get involved in fvwm configuration :p

fvwm config is easy, once you've read it's manual :D

[graudeejs]

i think this would do what you want
DestroyFunc StartAppOnNewDesk
AddToFunc StartAppOnNewDesk
+ I Next (currentdesk) nop
+ I TestRc (Match) GotoDesk 1 0 0 10
+ I Exec exec $*

now to start app you will have to use
Funciton StartAppOnNewDesk xterm
for example


Red 10, assumes you have 10 Virtual Desks, this is not bulletproof implementation, as I only wrote it to show how simple things are

[Stilgart]

I am doing some opengl development and I am not keen on tiling, it moves all the text around in vim as it is resized and kinda gets on my nerves :p




In scrotwm (for instance), you can say in the configuration file that some applications (typically mplayer) should not be tiled. This is not what you asked for, but maybe it will reconcile you with tiling WM.

[kpedersen]

Hmm that has given me an idea of trying to set everything to open in monocle mode by default. Although it isn't 100% what I want, it will stop the tiling at least.

In dwm I think it is as easy as swapping entries in layouts[].

[mwatkins]

I.e imagine dwm, but when I launch firefox on the original fullscreen xterm, it doesnt open it up tiled with xterm, but instead moves it automatically to desktop 2?

dwm can do this, that is default functionality. Check config.h and look at the section where Rules is defined.

static Rule rules[] = {
/* class instance title tags mask isfloating */
{ "Gimp", NULL, NULL, 0, True },
{ "Gvim", NULL, NULL, 2, False },
{ "Firefox", NULL, NULL, 3, False },
/* ... */
};

In this example gvim opens full screen in desktop 3, Firefox in desktop 4. Gimp opens wherever and in floating mode.

[kpedersen]

Yes, I did have a play.

However I wanted to avert the need for setting up every application I may want to run specifically.

Instead by moving the monocle entry in layouts to the top of the definition, it set monocle as default.

It works pretty well although since xterm doesnt maximize 100% (small gaps around edges) I can sometimes see a window behind it. This isn't really a problem for usability howerver :p