FreeBSD Screen Shots

Alain De Vos said:
Don't you have a tool to take screenshots
2022-04-25-013528_1280x800_scrot (2).png
Click to expand...
 
grahamperrin said:
Ah, I was half-looking for something to indicate ssh at the command prompt.

Is that ssh something in the title bar of the foreground window?
Click to expand...
yes it is a combination of scripts with cwm , tmux ,xterm and other stuffs

CWM is just a great thing. Functional, fast...100% customizable . no GNU stuffs inside the base system of OpenBSD
 
jbodenmann said:
Now I'm looking into bspwm... damit man, this might be more what I had in mind than i3.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to follow up on this. I've taken a look at bspwm and gave it a try. I almost immediately switched from i3 to bspwm and I am not looking back! Thank you guys for introducing me to bspwm. It's just more my style. It seems so much more lightweight, easier to configure and more unix-like. I like it!
 
knightjp said:
… from what I've learned about KDE in the past couple of days, its is just a default design. Each item that makes up the desktop are nothing more than panels and widgets arranged that way, hence it can be changed into anything that you wish.
This is actually a brilliant way of doing stuff.
I wanted the macOS style layout of the global menu and the dock. I've tried others but this is what I prefer. …
Click to expand...

knightjp as promised:

1652914362172.png

  • global menu top, centre
  • Apple-menu like things in the global menu, and at top left
  • close icons far left, including the sidebar of Firefox
  • minimise and maximise buttons also to the left.
Firefox does not work with the global menu widget, I don't mind because my Firefox menu bar is loaded with stuff that would not fit the widget:

1652914717710.png
 
knightjp said:
Why would you need to activate it if FreeBSD is open source? That doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...
Red Hat Enterprise Linux does have similar even though it is open-source. It has an annoying popup just like this that complains that the machine is "not subscribed".

Yes, the OS won't cripple itself unlike more consumer operating systems, but you basically have no access to the package repos. This is what they are monetizing I believe.

Weirdly, even though I would never use something like this myself; I don't think it is 100% unethical to get paid to maintain decent packages. However I would much prefer to see some of the money going to the individual program authors rather than just Red Hat for packaging them. Even a 50/50 split would be nice, even though packaging software is *much* easier than writing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top