Page 1 of 1
MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:30 am
by PPC
During my increasingly less free time, I tried, in antiX and Mx other WM: Enlightenment (E. for short).
There are many things that particular WM does right: small memory footprint (some 50Mb less than Fluxbox!), manages desktop icons and wallpapers by itself, has composition, lots of eye candy (like window previews) and it's very simple to add icons to the toolbar or the preferred applications menu. It's gorgeous, if you happen to like eye candy and animations- looks like a full blown DE (like XFCE, but with even more eye candy). It has a amazing and blazing fast app and file searcher!
I do recommend E. if you want a even lower resources usage, and like eye candy...
But... I went back to MXFB- I feel like it's a bit like my baby- I tweaked until It looks like I wanted it to look (I posted a screen shot, a while ago, I don't even need to run the Dock- it's great, but I want to conserve my RAM - my OS looks a Kind of MX XFCE with a bottom toolbar) and has all the the functionality I wanted it to have (for window previews I use skippy-XD; for app and file searcher, the excellent and fast Drill; and have a menu generator that does not even need to be installed!).
MXFB it's rock solid- the icons don't go missing out of the blue, like they sometimes do in E. Nor do "gadgets" jump around randomly when you are moving them.
Fluxbox does look way more spartan, with very little eye candy- and even uses a bit more RAM- but, when I put an icon on screen, it stays there, allowing me to launch my apps as fast as possible.
What are OS's and WM and DE's suppose to do? Allow users to run the apps they need, no matter if it's for work or play!
It's not even particulary hard to make MXFB have a fully working menu - it costs only a line in the menu (in my case "All Categories") and I can use all the apps I want from there, without using XFCE's launcher. I even wrote a small script to put (or remove) my prefered apps on the start of menu!
So, despite having some minor disagreements with Jerry's default design choices, I do believe MXFB, is, in fact one of the (lower resources) system available out there, while providing a ample array of tools and almost infinite application choices.
Well done Jerry, and the rest of the Dev team!
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:48 am
by mxer
Another popular WM is Openbox, very similar to fluxbox; a lighter, seemingly more useful WM, would be JWM, or IceWM; each to their own.
(My personal favourite is Fluxbox as in AntiX.)
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:27 am
by ceeslans
PPC wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:30 am<snip>
...and has all the the functionality I wanted it to have (for window previews I use skippy-XD; for app and file searcher, the excellent and fast Drill; and have a menu generator that does not even need to be installed!).
<snip>
... It's not even particulary hard to make MXFB have a fully working menu - it costs only a line in the menu (in my case "All Categories") and I can use all the apps I want from there, without using XFCE's launcher. I even wrote a small script to put (or remove) my prefered apps on the start of menu!
...
@ppc: could you please explain a bit more about the menu generator - and script to add/remove preferred apps on the startmenu.
would love to see how you are doing that, thanks!
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:44 am
by Jerry3904
@PPC: thanks for the good words, and for your helpful ongoing critique during development.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:48 am
by dolphin_oracle
PPC wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:30 am
During my increasingly less free time, I tried, in antiX and Mx other WM: Enlightenment (E. for short).
There are many things that particular WM does right: small memory footprint (some 50Mb less than Fluxbox!), manages desktop icons and wallpapers by itself, has composition, lots of eye candy (like window previews) and it's very simple to add icons to the toolbar or the preferred applications menu. It's gorgeous, if you happen to like eye candy and animations- looks like a full blown DE (like XFCE, but with even more eye candy). It has a amazing and blazing fast app and file searcher!
I do recommend E. if you want a even lower resources usage, and like eye candy...
But... I went back to MXFB- I feel like it's a bit like my baby- I tweaked until It looks like I wanted it to look (I posted a screen shot, a while ago, I don't even need to run the Dock- it's great, but I want to conserve my RAM - my OS looks a Kind of MX XFCE with a bottom toolbar) and has all the the functionality I wanted it to have (for window previews I use skippy-XD; for app and file searcher, the excellent and fast Drill; and have a menu generator that does not even need to be installed!).
MXFB it's rock solid- the icons don't go missing out of the blue, like they sometimes do in E. Nor do "gadgets" jump around randomly when you are moving them.
Fluxbox does look way more spartan, with very little eye candy- and even uses a bit more RAM- but, when I put an icon on screen, it stays there, allowing me to launch my apps as fast as possible.
What are OS's and WM and DE's suppose to do? Allow users to run the apps they need, no matter if it's for work or play!
It's not even particulary hard to make MXFB have a fully working menu - it costs only a line in the menu (in my case "All Categories") and I can use all the apps I want from there, without using XFCE's launcher. I even wrote a small script to put (or remove) my prefered apps on the start of menu!
So, despite having some minor disagreements with Jerry's default design choices, I do believe MXFB, is, in fact one of the (lower resources) system available out there, while providing a ample array of tools and almost infinite application choices.
Well done Jerry, and the rest of the Dev team!
P.
Its one of the things I like about my antiX-fluxbox setup is that once you get done customizing, you can really make fluxbox sing. I always map Super_L to bring up the fluxbox menu, so that thing I don't need desktop space to right click on and I can full screen my apps. (keys file, Super_L: rootMenu)
I would like some more info on that menu setup though. I agree, having applications on the fluxbox menu is what mx-fb setup is missing.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:32 am
by Jerry3904
Well, the menu does have "All apps" which brings up the full Whisker menu so for me they're not missing at all. Just sort of compacted.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:37 am
by dolphin_oracle
Jerry3904 wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:32 am
Well, the menu does have "All apps" which brings up the full Whisker menu so for me they're not missing at all. Just sort of compacted.
well, it brings up xfce4-appfinder in full mode. I like it, and it can stand separate from Xfce thanks to Xfce's modularity, but you still end up with one menu for fluxbox control and a second app for actual app launching. And it exposes Xfce applications that don't work in fluxbox. Logout for instance.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:41 am
by wdscharff
Therefore I like this community and this forum, the tips that come up at the same time and that you would never have thought of on your own, but that make the work easier and also meet (my) aesthetic demands
Whether it's the rounded corners, the idea of basic tiling windows or the menu to put on the super_L key.
I'm almost a bit nostalgic that after 5 years of using xfxe I'm switching so painlessly to Fluxbox ;-)
Translated with
www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:53 am
by dolphin_oracle
FWIW, instead of setting Super_L to the rootmenu like I don on antiX, on MX I have Super_L set to the xfce4-appfinder for application launching.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 11:18 am
by wdscharff
I do not use the xfce4-appfinder (anymore), I have everything in the menu.
The xfce4-appfinder occupies about 55 MB RAM after the first call, most appimages don't create a desktop file and I have to enter the wine programs manually into the menu, so the appfinder is of no use to me anyway.
So I once generated a menu with all programs that can be called with fbmenugen and integrated it as a submenu in my fluxbox menu. Because it looks so nice with icons. I don't mind that there are still a few duplicate entries and I still have to sort a bit.
Except the taskbar, the wallpaper and sometimes conky my desktop is empty. I like that :-)
Translated with
www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 11:30 am
by PPC
@dolphin_oracle :
To generate a complete Fluxbox menu I use "menumaker" (I think the link is
https://sourceforge.net/projects/menumaker/files/)
On my "menu-mx" file I added something like this (adapt as necessary):
## XFCE MENU- just paste the menu generated by MMaker here, under this line:
[submenu] (All Categories)
[exec] (Update Menu) {/home/[USER]/MMaker/menumaker-0.99.11/mmaker fluxbox -f}
[include] (~/.fluxbox/menu)
[end]
I simply uncompressed menumaker to the MMaker folder on my Home (no need to install it)
The "Update Menu" entry generates a new menu, running the command "mmaker fluxbox -f" (from the folder where it was uncompressed)- this generates or updates the menu (after installing/removing software)
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:35 pm
by mowest
@PPC
I think that I have used menumaker in the past with Fluxbox or maybe it was Openbox, but I didn't know the trick you show above how, you can automate the rebuilding of the menu. This is great information, thanks for sharing this with the community.
I would like to encourage consideration of including menumaker in future releases, and also PPC's trick so that MX-Fluxbox users have an updating menu. I'm a little surprised that menumaker is not in the Debian repos. I believe it has been around for a while.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:57 pm
by ceeslans
fwiw same can also be achieved with 'fbmenugen' --> an 18kb perl-script.
below scrot shows it is running in default mx rootmenu (~/.fluxbox/menu-mx).
it uses one entry in menu-mx (replacing the 'All Apps' line) to include a categorized application menu, generated by the script. if preferred, the user can regenerate it with icons - or plain text.

Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:08 pm
by Jerry3904
(FWIW: I had a non-traditional concept for the menu, I didn't just forget stuff.)
Since I already have an "All Apps" entry, it's easy to paste in the code there so no change in the menu translations would be required:

Going to have to think about this--I don't see the use for myself TBH.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:25 am
by PPC
ceeslans wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:57 pm
fwiw same can also be achieved with 'fbmenugen' --> an 18kb perl-script.
below scrot shows it is running in default mx rootmenu (~/.fluxbox/menu-mx).
it uses one entry in menu-mx (replacing the 'All Apps' line) to include a categorized application menu, generated by the script. if preferred, the user can regenerate it with icons - or plain text.
I never used this script because when I run fbmenugen I get this error:
Code: Select all
Can't locate Linux/DesktopFiles.pm in @INC (you may need to install the Linux::DesktopFiles module) (@INC contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24.1 /usr/local/share/perl/5.24.1 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl5/5.24 /usr/share/perl5 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24 /usr/share/perl/5.24 /usr/local/lib/site_perl /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl-base)
MMaker takes about 1 meg of disk space when uncompressed (vs 18kb), but works without any need to compile/install any dependencies, so I didn't even try to solve fbmenugen's problem ...
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:38 am
by PPC
Jerry3904 wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:08 pm
(FWIW: I had a non-traditional concept for the menu, I didn't just forget stuff.)
Since I already have an "All Apps" entry, it's easy to paste in the code there so no change in the menu translations would be required:
Going to have to think about this--I don't see the use for myself TBH.
Jerry: I understand both that having a small and concise menu, and relying on xfce's app launcher are personal design choices- In fact, I quite like both ideas- but I also like, because I have low resources machines, to be able to access all applications in a relatively fast way via the menu- I use the menu entry to "All categories" precisely to keep the original "all apps" entry! It's my own personal choice, for my own system. There are loads of ways of having a fast and simple access to all applications- a simple and effective one is bookmarking "/usr/share/applications/" on Thunar!
That's what's good about having Fluxbox running on MX, so manyyy ways to make the OS run just like we want it!
P.S.- If you are considering using any kind of full blown menu entry on MXFB menu- you could use a universal expression, like simply "Apps", that does not require translation on most languages (except oriental ones, Greek, Russian, etc)
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 6:28 am
by Jerry3904
PPC wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:25 am
I never used this script because when I run fbmenugen I get this error:
Code: Select all
Can't locate Linux/DesktopFiles.pm in @INC (you may need to install the Linux::DesktopFiles module) (@INC contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24.1 /usr/local/share/perl/5.24.1 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl5/5.24 /usr/share/perl5 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24 /usr/share/perl/5.24 /usr/local/lib/site_perl /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl-base)
P.
I had the same experience.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:02 am
by PPC
ceeslans wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 8:27 am
PPC wrote: Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:30 am<snip>
...and has all the the functionality I wanted it to have (for window previews I use skippy-XD; for app and file searcher, the excellent and fast Drill; and have a menu generator that does not even need to be installed!).
<snip>
... It's not even particulary hard to make MXFB have a fully working menu - it costs only a line in the menu (in my case "All Categories") and I can use all the apps I want from there, without using XFCE's launcher. I even wrote a small script to put (or remove) my prefered apps on the start of menu!
...
@ppc: could you please explain a bit more about the menu generator - and script to add/remove preferred apps on the startmenu.
would love to see how you are doing that, thanks!
Sorry, I forgot to reply to the add/remove preferred apps to the menu: the script is over
https://github.com/PPC-scripts/fluxbox- ... /README.md
Grab the MX version, make it executable, run it, and choose what .desktop file you want to pin to the top of the menu- this does not mess in any way with the rest of the menu, but, always have a backup copy before trying to mess with system configurations...
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:29 am
by ceeslans
Jerry3904 wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 6:28 am
PPC wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:25 am
I never used this script because when I run fbmenugen I get this error:
Code: Select all
Can't locate Linux/DesktopFiles.pm in @INC (you may need to install the Linux::DesktopFiles module) (@INC contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24.1 /usr/local/share/perl/5.24.1 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl5/5.24 /usr/share/perl5 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl/5.24 /usr/share/perl/5.24 /usr/local/lib/site_perl /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/perl-base)
P.
I had the same experience.
Hmmmm... you probably did not read the 'install-readme' about dependencies requirements, because this specified the need to install the included 'perl-linux-desktopfiles_0.25-1.deb' ...

Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:35 am
by Jerry3904
I read it, grand merci, but didn't see the deb, just the GitHub files.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:31 am
by Jerry3904
Been thinking about this some more, and have concluded that it would be more consistent for the next MXFB version to have the root menu's "All apps" open even more menus (which I was trying to avoid) than it would be to launch AppFinder, which is best suited for the dock.
Doesn't mean I like or will use it myself...
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:39 am
by jeffreyC
Back about 10 years ago Linux Mint Fluxbox had a self updating menu mint-fm2, which was a rewrite in bash of marchfluxmenu which was in python 2.5.2+.
http://packages.linuxmint.com/pool/main/m/mint-fm2/
https://code.google.com/archive/p/marchfluxmenu/
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:10 pm
by mowest
Jerry3904 wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:31 am
Been thinking about this some more, and have concluded that it would be
more consistent for the next MXFB version to have the root menu's "All apps" open even more menus (which I was trying to avoid) than it would be to launch AppFinder, which is best suited for the dock.
Doesn't mean I like or will use it myself...
Jerry, I agree with your thinking. I believe that fluxbox users from the past will appreciate the ability to get to all of their apps from the menu system. I also appreciate that MX-Fluxbox provides users with a few different options when it comes to launching their apps, but giving a full menu experience to users will be just another nice option. Some will prefer, some will prefer the XFCE4 Application Finder, and some will create idesk or dock launchers.
Personally, I like the functionality of clicking a key combination and typing in the name of the app to launch something. This is standard behavior in Gnome 3, XFCE Whisker menu, and Plasma too. I want to love FBrun, but its lack of "tab completion" or an updating visual list doesn't work for me because I don't always remember the name of the program exactly. I've been testing Rofi as a possible launcher to use in MX-Fluxbox for me. I don't know if it would be worth adding it to MX-Fluxbox because we have a similar tool with the XFCE Application Finder, but I'm testing it to see if it might be a nicer and more lightweight launcher for my use.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:44 pm
by Jerry3904
Thanks. I agree that the problem is usually long time fb users, especially those coming from antiX. My goal from the beginning was to get 3 ways of dealing, and changing "All apps" to a menu of menus is consistent with that.
I use fbrun but it sure is limited, so am interested in finding an alternative.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:55 pm
by PPC
@Jerry3984
There are many alternatives to fbrun, but some are not mainstream:
dmenu
j4dmenu (that uses .desktop files, allowing to search the apps description too) (
https://github.com/enkore/j4-dmenu-desktop)
rofi (to use it as a basic app launcher: "rofi -show run", to use info from the .desktop files "rofi -modi drun -show drun" )
synapse (that I never used)
A combo of file/app searcher, that I use, low on resorces and fast - drill (
https://github.com/yatima1460/Drill)
by far, the fastest is dmenu/j4dmenu- but it has an unusual interface. I use j4demu on my menu too- with a less "different" interface, and also showing the last run apps first:
[exec] (Search Apps) { ~/Downloads/j4-dmenu-desktop.sh --dmenu="dmenu -i -fn ubuntu -b -l 10" --usage-log=j4log.txt}
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:55 pm
by Jerry3904
I snooped around, and am now testing rofi. Very helpful entry (as always)
in the Arch Wiki.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:22 pm
by figueroa
Those wanting a lightweight XFCE replacement that behaves well with no fuss or muss, install LXDE from MXPI. LXDE is what I'm running on my MX-19 installation because the new XFCE does not hanle transparency in an x2go remote session. LXDE worked for me out-of-the-box with NO customizing except for having to install lxpolkit (required for root permissions on menu items) and obconf (provides an gui for configuration of OpenBox configuration items) . LXDE runs on top of OpenBox, so installing LXDE also gives you the option of running just the OpenBox WM without LXDE, which I don't like or use. lxpolkit and obconf were to be added to the MXPI package, but I just did a fresh trial install and they have not yet been added, so if you do install LXDE, be sure to install those also. Maybe if I had installed ALL the pending updates I would have found LXDE providing lxpolkit and obconf, but just in case, keep an eye out for them.
LXDE uses roughly 300-320Mi (free -h) in a local session not running any applications other than a terminal.
I have also installed these additional packages just to have the additional tools: gtk2-engines, gnome-disk-utility, gnome-system-tools, gucharmap, usermode, lxhotkey-plugin-openbox, lxhotkey-data, obconf, and task-lxde-desktop (this last one adds desktop-base, fonts-quicksand, task-desktop, task-lxde-desktop, tasksel, tasksel-data).
Confession: I am a long-time (10 or more years) LXDE user and fanboy. My views are jaded. Your mileage may vary, but I don't think LXDE will shoot you in the foot.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 4:41 pm
by mowest
Jerry3904 wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 1:55 pm
I snooped around, and am now testing rofi. Very helpful entry (as always)
in the Arch Wiki.
I think rofi offers the functionality that you are looking for, and the ability to theme it in a way that fits nicely with the current theming and future default theming of MX-Fluxbox.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 6:35 pm
by clicktician
How do you guys get apps started with gksu et. al. to work when you're not using XFCE.
I often use Openbox that you get for free if you just install LXDE. But like Dolphin says, not everything in XFCE works. Is there a compatibility trick, or do you just have to wing some alternative stuff?
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:05 pm
by dolphin_oracle
we don't use gksu
that said, look in the fluxbox ~/.fluxbox/startup file and you'll see an entry for the gnome policy kit authenticator. that's what we use.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:10 pm
by jeffreyC
gmrun has tab completion and history, so if you have run it before all you need to do is arrow up to find it.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 4:36 am
by PPC
jeffreyC wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2020 7:10 pm
gmrun has tab completion and history, so if you have run it before all you need to do is arrow up to find it.
I just tested gmrun- it has tab completion all right, but it's not as powerful as rofi- if you try to run "writer" (libreoffice --writer) it does not find it- so gmrun is good, but not for running apps that depend on flags to run... the history is nice though (that's why I like my j4dmenu setup so much- it has history too)
It's nice knowing another good tool, thanks, Jeffrey!
P.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:04 am
by Jerry3904
Got rofi running well (F2), very fast and good looking (many themes). Doubling it with Alt-F2: xfce4-appfinder -c which doesn't need the exact name (e.g., "writer" works with it, doesn't with rofi).
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 7:07 am
by PPC
Jerry3904 wrote: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:04 am
Got rofi running well (F2), very fast and good looking (many themes). Doubling it with Alt-F2: xfce4-appfinder -c which doesn't need the exact name (e.g., "writer" works with it, doesn't with rofi).
Jerry, like I pointed out when I talked about some "launcher" options, there are several ways of starting rofi... Please try this:
this searches .desktop file names, and allows to launch writer, if you type "writer"- you can even search by "processor" (word processor) :-)
I even found a youtube video that showed several ways of configuring ROFI: I copied this command, that uses a new color scheme, and also lists running windows (nice if you have many open windows and forgot, for example, you were already running writer to edit a particular file, for example...):
Code: Select all
rofi -combi-modi window,drun -show combi -color-window "#000000, #000000, #000000" -color-normal "#000000, #b3e774, #000000, #b3e774, #000000" -color-active "#000000, #b3e774, #000000, #b3e774, #000000" -color-urgent "#000000, #b3e774, #000000, #b3e774, #000000"
Edit:
I just noticed how well you already configured rofi to match with Fluxbox colors...
If this all gets into the next MXFB update, I think it will both look amazing and run incredibly fast even on old/slow hardware!
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 8:16 am
by Jerry3904
Thanks, I know about the drun stuff and watched a couple of videos myself. I'm not interested in a third menu so didn't hi that way. But I think rofi over fbrun is a no-brainer.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:09 am
by mowest
Jerry3904 wrote: Wed Jul 29, 2020 8:16 am
Thanks, I know about the drun stuff and watched a couple of videos myself. I'm not interested in a third menu so didn't hi that way. But I think rofi over fbrun is a no-brainer.
I'm so excited that you are having fun with rofi on MX-Fluxbox. One feature that new users might appreciate. You can turn on icons, so they can see a visual reminder that they are choosing their desired application besides the name. Since my desktop has an orange look to the theme, I was able to find an orange themed rofi theme that looks great with my wallpaper and conky.
mxfluxbox-rofi.png
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:15 am
by Jerry3904
I'm still not getting icons. Do you have dmenu installed?
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:26 am
by mowest
Jerry3904 wrote: Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:15 am
I'm still not getting icons. Do you have dmenu installed?
This is the line that I have in my keys file to launch rofi with icons:
Code: Select all
mod4 space :Exec rofi -modi drun -show drun -show-icons
No, I don't have dmenu installed, but as you can see I do use the "drun" flags.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2020 12:38 pm
by Jerry3904
Oh, I see. Thanks.
Here is the line to be put in the config file (~/.config/rofi/config.rasi) then:
Then I can use Crtl+arrow to switch from run (no icons, no partial match) to drun (icons and partial match) to ssh. Not sure if I am going to stay with drun, but am glad to have it solved.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:06 am
by PPC
@Jerry3904 - Since this thread became a almost unofficial thread about suggestions to MXFB, I see no point in starting a new one just to ask this:
I know you like the very minimalist Fluxbox menu... But since you are serious considering adding a full blown menu... Is there any interest in also adding one of my previous suggestions- a "Recent files" menu entry?
Since Fb does not have dynamic menus, this can only, to my knowledge, be done using a script. I have one writen, but I got some feedback in the antiX forum and it does not work well in non Latin characters ( cyrilic in particular)...
For anyone wanting to test that script, it's below (just paste the code into a text file called something like "recent_files.sh", save it, make it executable and run it. You can, of course add it to the menu, create a shortcut idesk icon, or a dock icon, so it can be easily accessible...
Code: Select all
#!/bin/bash
### Recent files window- by PPC, 13/1/2020, for use with antiX and MX-fluxbox
#GPL licence- do what you want with this, but please keep lines about the author, date and licence
# works on any system with yad and xdg-open installed, optionally: exo-open (see exceptions to the general rule, when launching files, near the end.
# https://pastebin.com/fSDPR9E1
#Parse the file that stores the recent used files, send output to recent0.txt
awk -F"file://|\" " '/file:\/\// {print $2}' ~/.local/share/recently-used.xbel > ~/.recent0.txt
#reverse contents order, so last file comes first, and so on...
tac ~/.recent0.txt > ~/.recent.txt
#function to decode file name (from %20 instead of spaces, etc, from https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/159253/decoding-url-encoding-percent-encoding
urldecode() {
local url_encoded="${1//+/ }"
printf '%b' "${url_encoded//%/\\x}"
}
# Use a undecorated Yad window to select file to be executed
EXEC=$(yad --title="Recent files" --undecorated --width=450 --height=400 --center --separator=" " --list --column=" Recent Files:" < ~/.recent.txt)
#do decoding on the file name, just in case it has spaces or special characters that come up as %xx
decoded=$(urldecode $EXEC)
# general rule: open selected file with the aplication used for its file type
openwith=xdg-open
###Exceptions to the general rule: LibreOffice Writer ".odt" files - check extension and force it to open with lowriter; also more exceptions: like open ".sh" files for edition and run ".desktop" files instead of editing them
check=$(echo -n $EXEC | tail -c 3)
if [ "$check" == "odt" ]; then openwith=lowriter ; fi #this solves bug opening odt files with spaces
if [ "$check" == ".sh" ]; then openwith=exo-open ; fi
if [ "$check" == "top" ]; then openwith=exo-open ; fi
#add quotes to the file name, just in case it has spaces
EXEC2="'"$decoded"'"
#launch the selected file
run=$(echo $openwith $EXEC2)
eval $run
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:39 am
by Jerry3904
I'll take a look, thanks. Not sure ATM how much use it would be, for me at least, but will find out.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:42 am
by Jerry3904
BTW: I have found a nifty and very powerful "calc" plugin that I have asked to be packaged. Usage not obvious, but am going to do up a Help file.
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:45 am
by PPC
@Jerry3904: If you mean this (
https://github.com/svenstaro/rofi-calc) it looks great! I never heard of it...
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 10:04 am
by Jerry3904
We just packaged it up and it should show up in the repo pretty soon. You have to install qalculate and then use the modus
calc: qalc
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 7:29 am
by ceeslans
PPC wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:06 am
<snip>
... Is there any interest in also adding one of my previous suggestions- a "Recent files" menu entry?
Since Fb does not have dynamic menus, this can only, to my knowledge, be done using a script. I have one written, but I got some feedback in the antiX forum and it does not work well in non Latin characters ( cyrilic in particular)...
For anyone wanting to test that script, it's below (just paste the code into a text file called something like "recent_files.sh", save it, make it executable and run it. You can, of course add it to the menu, create a shortcut idesk icon, or a dock icon, so it can be easily accessible...
Code: Select all
#!/bin/bash
### Recent files window- by PPC, 13/1/2020, for use with antiX and MX-fluxbox
#GPL licence- do what you want with this, but please keep lines about the author, date and licence
# works on any system with yad and xdg-open installed, optionally: exo-open (see exceptions to the general rule, when launching files, near the end.
# https://pastebin.com/fSDPR9E1
#Parse the file that stores the recent used files, send output to recent0.txt
awk -F"file://|\" " '/file:\/\// {print $2}' ~/.local/share/recently-used.xbel > ~/.recent0.txt
#reverse contents order, so last file comes first, and so on...
tac ~/.recent0.txt > ~/.recent.txt
#function to decode file name (from %20 instead of spaces, etc, from https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/159253/decoding-url-encoding-percent-encoding
urldecode() {
local url_encoded="${1//+/ }"
printf '%b' "${url_encoded//%/\\x}"
}
# Use a undecorated Yad window to select file to be executed
EXEC=$(yad --title="Recent files" --undecorated --width=450 --height=400 --center --separator=" " --list --column=" Recent Files:" < ~/.recent.txt)
#do decoding on the file name, just in case it has spaces or special characters that come up as %xx
decoded=$(urldecode $EXEC)
# general rule: open selected file with the aplication used for its file type
openwith=xdg-open
###Exceptions to the general rule: LibreOffice Writer ".odt" files - check extension and force it to open with lowriter; also more exceptions: like open ".sh" files for edition and run ".desktop" files instead of editing them
check=$(echo -n $EXEC | tail -c 3)
if [ "$check" == "odt" ]; then openwith=lowriter ; fi #this solves bug opening odt files with spaces
if [ "$check" == ".sh" ]; then openwith=exo-open ; fi
if [ "$check" == "top" ]; then openwith=exo-open ; fi
#add quotes to the file name, just in case it has spaces
EXEC2="'"$decoded"'"
#launch the selected file
run=$(echo $openwith $EXEC2)
eval $run
@PPC: Ohhh, I like that one, it works great.
I call it from the FB menu, with the yad script opening near the mouse (--mouse).
Afaik, most extensions are opened with the correct application - except executable bash scripts that are without extension... these are opened (not executed) by terminal emulator - instead of the texteditor (being default execution when opened in filemanager).
Is there any way to tell the script to open in a texteditor - other than renaming all scriptfiles systemwide to *.sh of course...
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2020 8:04 am
by Jerry3904
Pretty neat! Worth thinking about for next mxfb...
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 7:54 am
by Jerry3904
@PPC: OK, been looking at this and have a couple of suggestions/requests.
1) I ran into Ceeslans's problem as well. On my system,
exo-open correctly opens a shell script without extension using geany (though default I think would be featherpad). I see you have exceptions at the end of your script and hope this could be corrected there. Would this work (< stackexchange):
Code: Select all
if [ "`head -c 2 infile`" = "#!" ]; then openwith=exo-open ; fi
2) Files changed a month ago are not "recent" in my world, and I would like to let the user limit the entries in recently-used.xbel. Maybe there could be some declaration like this that could be inserted into an AWK expression:
Code: Select all
DATESINCE="today - <some number of days>"
Default could be 7 maybe, though I would use 3 myself.
3) I might fiddle with the yad box a bit...
Thanks
Re: MX Fluxbox versus other Window Managers and Desktop Envioroments
Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:33 am
by Jerry3904
Hmmm, don't think that works. Tried this without apparent success as well:
Code: Select all
#for shell scripts without extension
shebang=$(grep -q == "#!")
if [ "$shebang" == "0" ]; then openwith=xdg-open ; fi
Giving up...