[uClibc]fvwm2 & others wm

Christian MICHON christian_michon at yahoo.fr
Wed Feb 19 02:01:29 UTC 2003


Andreas wrote:
> yes thanks christian. i get it running now. i use 0.9.17 and get XFree4.2.1 
> compiled in a standart way (just unzipping etc.). before i reinstalled
> bison, flex, perl5.8.0 . at the "make install" he crashed at the xdm, but
> the libaries what i need for fvwm was installed already. 

You need to change the SUBDIRS in xc/programs/Makefile and remove *XDM*
there before any "make install"

> compiling 2.4.6 was no problem. 2.4.15 (current stable) crashes with:
> 
> FvwmBacker.o: In function `main':
<snip>
> make: *** [all] Error 2

I think you meant the compilation crashed, not the wm, is it ? 

I never used that fvwm2 module. My point of view there is: if I
choose uclibc, my space & ressources are limited. If I go for
fvwm2, I should therefore use as little modules as possible
(or I should revert to glibc). My actual fvwm2rc (65 lines) does
not even call a module. It's pure fvwm2, not even with xpm
support. Super small ;)

Opinions may differ, I know. Just before this goes OT, I'd like
to share these figures of SZ & RSS of various window managers,
to help anyone making a choice for uclibc TinyX. These memory
figures were on Sparc, though, but they can scale well to x86.

2480 1424 failsafewm
2504 1440 heliwm - alpha
2496 1456 windowlab - noshape
2496 1464 windowlab
2504 1472 heliwm - standard
2504 1544 evilwm
3328 2240 fvwm2
(smaller SZ & RSS is considered better)

Hope this helps. There are **more** wm out there. These are
pure C, not C++. For C++, wm2 & wmx is IMHO an excellent
choice.

Christian

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com



More information about the uClibc mailing list