Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FVWM-95 (2001)

fvwm95.sourceforge.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#81

Post by fragmede »

gldrk wrote: post #20
fragmede wrote: post #14

Does anyone remember MPX? It was a set of patches on top of X11 that let two people use one computer at the same time. Two mouse pointers for two mice, and two keyboards for input. It was super fun in a dorm environment (I was at Random hall at the time) to browse the Internet with friends. I wonder what it works take to revive it for Wayland.

It's part of XInput 2.0 and works as well as it ever did with upstream X.org. The more popular approach to multiseating these days involves logind, udev and two video cards (or drm-lease-manager). Then the two display servers are completely independent from each other, which may or may not be what you want.

It seems Wayland actually natively supports this via wl_seat, so multiple people can be at one computer! I can't wait to test this out!

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#82

Post by Agingcoder »

pjmlp wrote: post #37

The original fvwm was my first window manager in Linux back in 1995, I was not a fan of the evolution into fvwm-95, though. By then I was already into other window managers.

I liked window maker and enlightenment, both of a which appeared a bit later.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#84

Post by jmclnx »

alan-crowe wrote: post #65

I'm still using fvwm2 $ pkg info fvwm fvwm-2.6.9_4 Name : fvwm Version : 2.6.9_4 Installed on : Mon Dec 8 02:01:51 2025 GMT Origin : x11-wm/fvwm2 Architecture : FreeBSD:15:amd64 Very happy with it :-)

Same here, still using fvwm2, and have tested fvwm3. I use it on large screens. fvwm is the main reason I dread wayland taking over. But at least the *BSDs will be on X for a while longer.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#85

Post by sombragris »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #80
sombragris wrote: post #49

fvwm is still one of the default graphical environments in Slackware (even in -current), and fvwm95 came packaged for some time, too. Now fvwm95 is no longer part of the basic Slackware distribution but there's a SlackBuild for it: https://slackbuilds.org/repository/15.0/desktop/fvwm95/ I like the Win95 aesthetic, but I like a close relative, KDE1, better; and I have configured my Plasma 6 setup along these lines. Sc…

To each his own. I had a phase of emulating the classic W2K look, but like W95/98/ME all of this it feels too dark, dirty greyish for me now. Still in times of late KDE3 I then switched to https://store.kde.org/p/1100735/ but with different more colorful (soft pastel) icons which I can't remember the name of anymore, later then to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluecurve , but not like the ugly default depicted there.…

I concur in your liking of Breeze. It's an amazing teme, really. My only objection is that the default light color scheme is too light. Fortunately there are good color schemes such as Steel or StormClouds that solve that problem, a light theme that isn't too "white".

StormClouds: https://store.kde.org/p/1001459

Steel (no longer shipped by default, but still available at the KDE Store): https://store.kde.org/p/1311274

As for the monitors, I have them because sometimes I have issues with CPU speed (due to a hardware quirk of my laptop) and the network connection is kinda iffy at the time.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#86

Post by signa11 »

jmclnx wrote: post #84
alan-crowe wrote: post #65

I'm still using fvwm2 $ pkg info fvwm fvwm-2.6.9_4 Name : fvwm Version : 2.6.9_4 Installed on : Mon Dec 8 02:01:51 2025 GMT Origin : x11-wm/fvwm2 Architecture : FreeBSD:15:amd64 Very happy with it :-)

Same here, still using fvwm2, and have tested fvwm3. I use it on large screens. fvwm is the main reason I dread wayland taking over. But at least the *BSDs will be on X for a while longer.

one of us, one of us ! there are literally hundreds out there !

i for one have migrated to fvwm3 (https://github.com/fvwmorg/fvwm3) almost everywhere i can. i don't think i am ever switching to anything else. reason: nothing better exists :o) not for the lack of trying mind you !

heck, even at work, where i log into a aws machine, i have it running with x-forwarding over an ssh session (using x2go) from within my mac. it looks something like this: https://ibb.co/DHYbM45J

unfortunately, i just realized, that on github, my config is not up to date, will update in a couple of days.

i would be remiss to not mention my huge thanks (fwiw) to mr. thomas-adam the current maintainer + project-lead of fvwm3. thank you !

ps-01: for folks getting into it, this: https://www.zensites.net/fvwm/guide/index.html is not-too-shabby a launch point.

ps-02: deep wiki has fvwm3 indexed here: https://deepwiki.com/fvwmorg/fvwm3

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#87

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

sombragris wrote: post #85
LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To each his own. I had a phase of emulating the classic W2K look, but like W95/98/ME all of this it feels too dark, dirty greyish for me now. Still in times of late KDE3 I then switched to https://store.kde.org/p/1100735/ but with different more colorful (soft pastel) icons which I can't remember the name of anymore, later then to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluecurve , but not like the ugly default depicted there.…

I concur in your liking of Breeze. It's an amazing teme, really. My only objection is that the default light color scheme is too light. Fortunately there are good color schemes such as Steel or StormClouds that solve that problem, a light theme that isn't too "white". StormClouds: https://store.kde.org/p/1001459 Steel (no longer shipped by default, but still available at the KDE Store): https://store.kde.org/p/131127…

I tried both of them out. They are not for me, ATM. Maybe the too light for you results from different hardware. I have screens where I can adjust brightness and contrast separately, running at a color temperature of 5000K (warm).

That's different from what most laptops do, or fiddling with xgamma, or one of its frontends, using 'redshift', etc.

Even at brightest sunshine I don't go over 55% brightness, otherwise during the day, between 38% to 44%, at night just 20%, with contrast always two below these settings, or any I may use in between.

Despite all this, pictures look just right, even if I visit sites for calibration.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#88

Post by rgreekguy »

deafpolygon wrote: post #28

I love lightweight desktops, like this one. I just wish we could have a lightweight browser. Seems like you spin up a chrome browser and all that saving goes out the window

In my last job we had some memory issues with the build, many times I ended up running out of memory, trying to build the huge Java monolith that was the stupid "product" we made. Automagically, the issues were resolved to a decent extent when switching from GNOME to XFCE, in Ubuntu 24.04.

There is still some use for lightweight even in today. You make better use of your memory/resources in some application, than in something so fundamental.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#89

Post by pjmlp »

Agingcoder wrote: post #82
pjmlp wrote: post #37

The original fvwm was my first window manager in Linux back in 1995, I was not a fan of the evolution into fvwm-95, though. By then I was already into other window managers.

I liked window maker and enlightenment, both of a which appeared a bit later.

I only used Enlightenment for a while, now AfterStep/Windowmaker were my favourite window managers.

Re: FVWM-95 (2001)

#90

Post by anthk »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #80
sombragris wrote: post #49

fvwm is still one of the default graphical environments in Slackware (even in -current), and fvwm95 came packaged for some time, too. Now fvwm95 is no longer part of the basic Slackware distribution but there's a SlackBuild for it: https://slackbuilds.org/repository/15.0/desktop/fvwm95/ I like the Win95 aesthetic, but I like a close relative, KDE1, better; and I have configured my Plasma 6 setup along these lines. Sc…

To each his own. I had a phase of emulating the classic W2K look, but like W95/98/ME all of this it feels too dark, dirty greyish for me now. Still in times of late KDE3 I then switched to https://store.kde.org/p/1100735/ but with different more colorful (soft pastel) icons which I can't remember the name of anymore, later then to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluecurve , but not like the ugly default depicted there.…

Noia icons maybe. On KDE3, I liked the Slick icon theme, it looked futuristic but grounded.
Post reply on HN