I'm a multi-boot kind of guy. Both my laptop and my desktop generally have three different Linux distros installed {and configured suit to my needs and tastes} But my vererable old mono-processor desktop has just been replaced by a former Win7 HP Pavilion. So I've begun the new installation from current iso downloads of three Linux distros. I was happy with the way rolling release worked with the old antix 11 installation. So I'm about to download and install some antiX version. I notice that there are release specific forums for both 'antiX-15 Killah P' & 'antiX MX-15 Fusion'. I'm not sure which would be a better fit for me...
But as I recall my old antiX 11's default sources list was heavily commented with instruction on what to comment out and what to uncomment, to make it update as a rolling release. {was it really that simple?} Is either antiX-11 or MX-11 {better/easier/"more reliable"} as a long term rolling release???
I should probably mention that I don't normally use a DE such as kde or gnome (though I do use applications from several DE projects. __{{emoticon}}__ I do like to have lxde or better yet lxqt installed as a back up to a bare openbox session {with a highly customised configuration}.
I saw something somewhere about putting antix on a bootable flashdrive that interested me.
I think I saw a post on the boards somewhere that indicated it was even possible to completely avoid systemd. That too, interested me.
Do either of those work better on which release of antiX???
15 posts
• Page 1 of 1
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
-
ShayPosts: 521
- Joined: 20 Apr 2015
#2
Antix 15 and 16-rc1 I use on persistent USB drives. Love that option.
Antix deals with Broadcom networking much better than MX for me.
Antix deals with Broadcom networking much better than MX for me.
-
skidooPosts: 1,445
- Joined: 09 Feb 2012
#3
'antiX-15 Killah P' & 'antiX MX-15 Fusion'
both enable you to avoid systemd
-=-
both ship isohybrid isos, suitable as bootable LiveUSB pendrive (or boot from CD)
-=-
both enable you to persist changes (if you wish) when booted to live session, and if you later choose to install to HDD, all your persisted live changes can be carried over to the HDD install
-=-
both also provide tools enabling you to"remaster" (create a bootable custom iso) from your installed and customized system
MX ships with XFCE desktop environment
-=-
antiX ships with fluxbox and iceWM and JWM and herblustfm ...and Rox and spacefm to handle desktop icons (if you wish)
From within your antiX desktop session, you can change (on the fly without logging out from your session) between the various window managers
IIRC, first version of MX was"MX-14"
antiX version 11... I doubt there's a currently-operating repository which contains compatible libraries/applications
I'm testing the soon-to-be-released antix16. Fresh in my memory is this stat:"install (from USB2 pendrive to 5400rpm SATA2 HDD) took only 3min 47seconds"
I encourage you to test both (antix and MX) and draw your own conclusion as to which better suits you/your hardware
both enable you to avoid systemd
-=-
both ship isohybrid isos, suitable as bootable LiveUSB pendrive (or boot from CD)
-=-
both enable you to persist changes (if you wish) when booted to live session, and if you later choose to install to HDD, all your persisted live changes can be carried over to the HDD install
-=-
both also provide tools enabling you to"remaster" (create a bootable custom iso) from your installed and customized system
MX ships with XFCE desktop environment
-=-
antiX ships with fluxbox and iceWM and JWM and herblustfm ...and Rox and spacefm to handle desktop icons (if you wish)
From within your antiX desktop session, you can change (on the fly without logging out from your session) between the various window managers
IIRC, first version of MX was"MX-14"
antiX version 11... I doubt there's a currently-operating repository which contains compatible libraries/applications
I'm testing the soon-to-be-released antix16. Fresh in my memory is this stat:"install (from USB2 pendrive to 5400rpm SATA2 HDD) took only 3min 47seconds"
I encourage you to test both (antix and MX) and draw your own conclusion as to which better suits you/your hardware
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
#4
Eat your heart out Puppy Linux, I just may have made my last bootable Puppy...
I meant to be asking about antiX 15 and MX 15...
I just checked my laptop where it's still a functional rolling release... I don't know, maybe it wasn't called an MX version. But here's whats left of it's sources.list after trimming out most of the commented out stuff...
That has worked well for me. And I really like the rolling release idea that keeps me from having to rebuild my environment from scratch every time a new release want's a"clean" lnstall...
Good!skidoo wrote:'antiX-15 Killah P' & 'antiX MX-15 Fusion'
both enable you to avoid systemd
-=-
So if I understand, the isohybred stuff is based on tools that come with either antiX or MX versions. And that there are downloadable isos that would let me burn a live cd first, then using the tools on the live cd {I presume a live dvd would work?} I could make a bootable live pendrive. Which I could then customize to use a highly customized bare openbox window manager session with my keybindings, an ~/.xinitrc loaded lxpanel, twelve desktop areas, with {courtesy of a ~/.config/openbox/autostart called script using qiv} a separate background image for each desktop area. This pendrive could then be booted and optionally installed on any PC I'd like to try it on. And other than hardware related tweaking, I could completely configure my user environment to work the way I want ONCE And then install it to multiple computers And not have to reconfigure my keybindings or apt-get all my personal application choices separately for each hard drive install?????both ship isohybrid isos, suitable as bootable LiveUSB pendrive (or boot from CD)
-=-
both enable you to persist changes (if you wish) when booted to live session, and if you later choose to install to HDD, all your persisted live changes can be carried over to the HDD install
-=-
both also provide tools enabling you to"remaster" (create a bootable custom iso) from your installed and customized system
MX ships with XFCE desktop environment
-=-
antiX ships with fluxbox and iceWM and JWM and herblustfm ...and Rox and spacefm to handle desktop icons (if you wish)
From within your antiX desktop session, you can change (on the fly without logging out from your session) between the various window managers
Eat your heart out Puppy Linux, I just may have made my last bootable Puppy...
My bad, I had a slight typo in my initial post:IIRC, first version of MX was"MX-14"
antiX version 11... I doubt there's a currently-operating repository which contains compatible libraries/applications
I meant to be asking about antiX 15 and MX 15...
I just checked my laptop where it's still a functional rolling release... I don't know, maybe it wasn't called an MX version. But here's whats left of it's sources.list after trimming out most of the commented out stuff...
Code: Select all
# See sources.list(5) for more information
# Note:If you want maximum stability, only use the stable/squeeze repos.
# MEPIS 11 series.
# Debian Testing. Default for antiX.
# Testing enabled for 'rolling' release.
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
#deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org testing main non-free
# opera Note opera testing redirects to stable & apt complains so THIS one
# uses the stable version.
deb http://deb.opera.com/opera/ stable non-free
Do BOTH antiX 15 and MX 15 use debian testing to effect a rolling release?I'm testing the soon-to-be-released antix16. Fresh in my memory is this stat:"install (from USB2 pendrive to 5400rpm SATA2 HDD) took only 3min 47seconds"
I encourage you to test both (antix and MX) and draw your own conclusion as to which better suits you/your hardware
That has worked well for me. And I really like the rolling release idea that keeps me from having to rebuild my environment from scratch every time a new release want's a"clean" lnstall...
-
dolphin_oraclePosts: 2,238
- Joined: 16 Dec 2007
#5
the live tools are powerful for sure.
mx-15 is jessie/stable only. but you also get the mepiscommunity mx repos.Do BOTH antiX 15 and MX 15 use debian testing to effect a rolling release?
yes. and unetbootin can be used to make liveUSB's directly from the iso.So if I understand, the isohybred stuff is based on tools that come with either antiX or MX versions. And that there are downloadable isos that would let me burn a live cd first, then using the tools on the live cd {I presume a live dvd would work?} I could make a bootable live pendrive.
with a little work, yes. I'm not sure about the .xinitrc stuff. you could start lxpanel in our home-grown desktop-session startup file, which maintains startup entries for any of the window managers currently installed on antiX, and I assume it will work once your openbox window manager is installed and set up to work with the display manager (slim in this case)Which I could then customize to use a highly customized bare openbox window manager session with my keybindings, an ~/.xinitrc loaded lxpanel, twelve desktop areas, with {courtesy of a ~/.config/openbox/autostart called script using qiv} a separate background image for each desktop area. This pendrive could then be booted and optionally installed on any PC I'd like to try it on. And other than hardware related tweaking, I could completely configure my user environment to work the way I want ONCE And then install it to multiple computers And not have to reconfigure my keybindings or apt-get all my personal application choices separately for each hard drive install?????
the live tools are powerful for sure.
-
skidooPosts: 1,445
- Joined: 09 Feb 2012
#6
jtwdyp, the provided tools in antiX and in MX are very flexible.
Unless your PC cannot boot from USB pendrive, you can skip the step"create a CD from the iso".
You can boot the liveUSB, setup persistence, make your customizations and:
If you wish, install to HDD from the pendrive. Your customizations will be carried over to the HDD install.
If you wish, use the live-remaster tool during a liveUSB session, to create one/various customized bootable pendrives.
Last September or so, someone bent on"keeping OB, just like my crunchybang..." did that: added openbox (and lightDM) to an antix15 system.
IIRC, nope, the antix-menu-manager doesn't autocreate openbox desktop menu entries.
You'll be resigned to hand-editing (obmenuconf utility?) your openbox menu each time you remove or install additional applications.
What feature(s), what benefit, does openbox provide which fluxbox lacks?
FWIW, that's a pointed question. I'm not aware of any significant benefits.
I don't pay attention to stuff like"can rearrange order of titlebar max/minimiz/close buttons".
Maybe openbox natively provides compositing/transparency (fluxbox does not) and that feature is important to you?
jtwdyp, it's probably easier/quicker to DO than it is explain or read someone's explanation.
Try it:
within an antiX live session (preferably a live + semi-automatic persistence boot session):
1) install lxpanel
2) desktop menu --} controlCentre --} Session --}"edit fluxbox files"
3) outcomment fbpanel in fluxbox session-startup config and insert a line to start lxpanel instead
4) logout from your desktop session
Immediately afterward, when you login to a fluxbox session (any of these in slim menu:"Fluxbox","Rox-fluxbox","Space-fluxbox")
maybe you'll have lxpanel as part of your environment, along with the benefit of automated desktop menu management.
If not, (I can't recall: does access to lxpanel configuration require presence of openbox? That's why I suggested searching prior forum posts)
you can discard the changes at shutdown (if semi-automatic persistence is in effect) or continue experimenting by additionally installing openbox.
Unless your PC cannot boot from USB pendrive, you can skip the step"create a CD from the iso".
You can boot the liveUSB, setup persistence, make your customizations and:
If you wish, install to HDD from the pendrive. Your customizations will be carried over to the HDD install.
If you wish, use the live-remaster tool during a liveUSB session, to create one/various customized bootable pendrives.
Your best source of info/advice for that older Mepis version would be the forum at mepiscommunity.orgI just checked my laptop where it's still a functional rolling release... I don't know, maybe it wasn't called an MX version.
Mepis 11
jtwdyp, search these forums for"openbox".you could start lxpanel in our home-grown desktop-session startup file, which maintains startup entries for any of the window managers currently installed on antiX,
and I assume it will work once your openbox window manager is installed and set up to work with the display manager (slim in this case)
Last September or so, someone bent on"keeping OB, just like my crunchybang..." did that: added openbox (and lightDM) to an antix15 system.
IIRC, nope, the antix-menu-manager doesn't autocreate openbox desktop menu entries.
You'll be resigned to hand-editing (obmenuconf utility?) your openbox menu each time you remove or install additional applications.
What feature(s), what benefit, does openbox provide which fluxbox lacks?
FWIW, that's a pointed question. I'm not aware of any significant benefits.
I don't pay attention to stuff like"can rearrange order of titlebar max/minimiz/close buttons".
Maybe openbox natively provides compositing/transparency (fluxbox does not) and that feature is important to you?
jtwdyp, it's probably easier/quicker to DO than it is explain or read someone's explanation.
Try it:
within an antiX live session (preferably a live + semi-automatic persistence boot session):
1) install lxpanel
2) desktop menu --} controlCentre --} Session --}"edit fluxbox files"
3) outcomment fbpanel in fluxbox session-startup config and insert a line to start lxpanel instead
4) logout from your desktop session
Immediately afterward, when you login to a fluxbox session (any of these in slim menu:"Fluxbox","Rox-fluxbox","Space-fluxbox")
maybe you'll have lxpanel as part of your environment, along with the benefit of automated desktop menu management.
If not, (I can't recall: does access to lxpanel configuration require presence of openbox? That's why I suggested searching prior forum posts)
you can discard the changes at shutdown (if semi-automatic persistence is in effect) or continue experimenting by additionally installing openbox.
-
masinickPosts: 1,139
- Joined: 26 Apr 2008
#7
I hope that I left the correct citation in here; I knocked out a lot of stuff to address just a couple of things:
1. re. the reference to Puppy: Both antiX and the current generation of MX owe at least some of the persistence functionality to work that has been experimented and honed over the years in Puppy, (and undoubtedly experimented with elsewhere as well, including in antiX and to some extent in MX). Both antiX and MX have definite benefits: antiX is one of the top platforms to use in order to customize a system to suit yourself.
2. MX actually comes from antiX, but is specialized to work with a stable version of Xfce, so MX is tied only to stable repositories, whereas you can use antiX with any Debian repo {stable,testing,unstable}. (MX is an Xfce stable replacement for MEPIS 11 - since MEPIS 12 stalled and was never released). Obviously"Stable" is the most likely to have 100% predictable behavior, but with care (and a moderate amount of knowledge) it's possible to build a pretty usable and moderately current system with any of them. Throw in"backports" with Stable to get newer versions of specific applications against a reliable, relatively unchanging base system, and you can get a really nice combination of a rock solid system, very few changes and maintenance, except on any programs you may want to keep more current (browsers are the most common example).
3. The repo listing that you provide updates only Debian Testing binaries plus Opera. With this, you'd typically be able to keep most screens and menus from an old system, such as MEPIS 11, but in reality you're running Debian Testing with a MEPIS 11 display (or antiX 11, or whatever distribution you started with). Does that make sense?
1. re. the reference to Puppy: Both antiX and the current generation of MX owe at least some of the persistence functionality to work that has been experimented and honed over the years in Puppy, (and undoubtedly experimented with elsewhere as well, including in antiX and to some extent in MX). Both antiX and MX have definite benefits: antiX is one of the top platforms to use in order to customize a system to suit yourself.
2. MX actually comes from antiX, but is specialized to work with a stable version of Xfce, so MX is tied only to stable repositories, whereas you can use antiX with any Debian repo {stable,testing,unstable}. (MX is an Xfce stable replacement for MEPIS 11 - since MEPIS 12 stalled and was never released). Obviously"Stable" is the most likely to have 100% predictable behavior, but with care (and a moderate amount of knowledge) it's possible to build a pretty usable and moderately current system with any of them. Throw in"backports" with Stable to get newer versions of specific applications against a reliable, relatively unchanging base system, and you can get a really nice combination of a rock solid system, very few changes and maintenance, except on any programs you may want to keep more current (browsers are the most common example).
3. The repo listing that you provide updates only Debian Testing binaries plus Opera. With this, you'd typically be able to keep most screens and menus from an old system, such as MEPIS 11, but in reality you're running Debian Testing with a MEPIS 11 display (or antiX 11, or whatever distribution you started with). Does that make sense?
jtwdyp wrote:
Eat your heart out Puppy Linux, I just may have made my last bootable Puppy...
I just checked my laptop where it's still a functional rolling release... I don't know, maybe it wasn't called an MX version. But here's whats left of it's sources.list after trimming out most of the commented out stuff...Code: Select all
# See sources.list(5) for more information # Note:If you want maximum stability, only use the stable/squeeze repos. # MEPIS 11 series. # Debian Testing. Default for antiX. # Testing enabled for 'rolling' release. deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free #deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org testing main non-free # opera Note opera testing redirects to stable & apt complains so THIS one # uses the stable version. deb http://deb.opera.com/opera/ stable non-free
That has worked well for me. And I really like the rolling release idea that keeps me from having to rebuild my environment from scratch every time a new release want's a"clean" lnstall...
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
#8
it was billed as a rolling release. {I really hate recreating my user environment
every time there's a new release} I won't claim I used it every day. But it was
dependable. And almost painless to keep updated. So if MX-15 is jessie/stable only
Then I'll start with antiX-15... And if I can dump systemd in the process, I just
might use it more often...
grub menu, and I boot to what used to be called runlevel 3 and run startx if/when I'm
ready for the gui. {Though admittedly about 95% of the time, startx is my first user command.}
I use my own wrapper script to select which window manager or desktop environment I want to
start. Which basically copies a a file like my ~/xinitrc-obox or ~/xinitrc-lxqt to ~/.xinitrc
just before it calls startx.
I type:
if I want lxqt to start, and openbox is even easier because if there isn't any
argument to xdo on the command line, it will use the ~/xinitrc-obox file...
I'm glad to hear that the slim DM is still there. Especially if I can dump systemd...
I presume that would mean system V. And the last time I set up a debian System V
system to boot to runlevel 3, slim was one of very few Display Managers that
respected update-rc.d start/stop settings. So once slim was selected as a display
manager, all I had to do was:
With a systemd system, I'd have to change the: default.target symlink to point at the: multi-user.target
Well on my laptop and my former desktop I chose antiX as my debian based distro becausedolphin_oracle wrote: mx-15 is jessie/stable only. but you also get the mepiscommunity mx repos.
it was billed as a rolling release. {I really hate recreating my user environment
every time there's a new release} I won't claim I used it every day. But it was
dependable. And almost painless to keep updated. So if MX-15 is jessie/stable only
Then I'll start with antiX-15... And if I can dump systemd in the process, I just
might use it more often...
I am perhaps a bit stubborn. I absolutely despise gui boot screens I use a text basedyes. and unetbootin can be used to make liveUSB's directly from the iso.So if I understand, the isohybred stuff is based on tools that come with either antiX or MX versions. And that there are downloadable isos that would let me burn a live cd first, then using the tools on the live cd {I presume a live dvd would work?} I could make a bootable live pendrive.
with a little work, yes. I'm not sure about the .xinitrc stuff. you could start lxpanel in our home-grown desktop-session startup file, which maintains startup entries for any of the window managers currently installed on antiX, and I assume it will work once your openbox window manager is installed and set up to work with the display manager (slim in this case)Which I could then customize to use a highly customized bare openbox window manager session with my keybindings, an ~/.xinitrc loaded lxpanel, twelve desktop areas, with {courtesy of a ~/.config/openbox/autostart called script using qiv} a separate background image for each desktop area. This pendrive could then be booted and optionally installed on any PC I'd like to try it on. And other than hardware related tweaking, I could completely configure my user environment to work the way I want ONCE And then install it to multiple computers And not have to reconfigure my keybindings or apt-get all my personal application choices separately for each hard drive install?????
the live tools are powerful for sure.
grub menu, and I boot to what used to be called runlevel 3 and run startx if/when I'm
ready for the gui. {Though admittedly about 95% of the time, startx is my first user command.}
I use my own wrapper script to select which window manager or desktop environment I want to
start. Which basically copies a a file like my ~/xinitrc-obox or ~/xinitrc-lxqt to ~/.xinitrc
just before it calls startx.
I type:
Code: Select all
$ xdo q
argument to xdo on the command line, it will use the ~/xinitrc-obox file...
I'm glad to hear that the slim DM is still there. Especially if I can dump systemd...
I presume that would mean system V. And the last time I set up a debian System V
system to boot to runlevel 3, slim was one of very few Display Managers that
respected update-rc.d start/stop settings. So once slim was selected as a display
manager, all I had to do was:
Code: Select all
update-rc.d -f slim remove
update-rc.d slim stop 20 2 3 4 5 .
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
#9
system has a similar tool called isodumper, but there may be an issue, THEIR download
page says all of their isos are compatible with flash drive installs, but cautions
against using unetbootin. So if the antiX iso wants unetbootin, I'm not sure
isodumper will work for it. I know it didn't work for my opensuse installation. But
blank dvd's are cheap, and I've got a package of 50 just sitting there, collecting dust.
But wait a minute let me check... YUP UNetbootin is available on opensuse so I just
did an:
And now have the right tool to put antiX iso on a flash drive. __{{emoticon}}__
especially the"setup persistence" part so that any work I put into customizing it
will carry over to my eventual hard drive install...
hunt that thread down.
But on most of the systems I've used it on, the menu is kind of static and not very
good for finding new applications. But I start most things from the command line or
with keybindings anyway. And one of the reasons I add lxpanel to my openbox session
is that unlike openbox's menu, lxpanel's embedded menu is usually automatically updated.
mouse well. But even from a virtual console I can put a copy of of my existing file
in any distribution's ~/.config/openbox/rc.xml. And assuming the same applications are
installed, my keybindings will work from the get go. I organize around my 12"desktop
areas" some of which have a dedicated purpose. For example I open anything related to
email or newsgroups in the one called with <ctrl>+<F2> <ctrl>+<F12> is where I'd open a
root konsole {though I'd run a system upgrade from a virtual console... only had to have
X crash in the middle of an upgrade once...}
My fingers know which keybinding to use to get to the right desktop area, each of
which has a separate background image. So if I fat fingered <ctrl>+<F3> instead of
<ctrl>+<F2> I'd notice before I opened a second instance of my alpine mailclint...
A LONG time ago I liked kde3 But that changed when they dumped kde4 on me.
the dev's wanted to make me use my computer their way, instead of mine... Wasn't gonna happen!
I tried enlightenment. And for a while was happy with E16. But E17 changed the
keybinding settings to a mouse intensive gui edit, and then every couple months
they'd change something that would trash my old keybindings and make me fight with
the mouse all day to put my keybindings back in... That all changed when I learned to
edit my own ~/.config/openbox/rc.xml. And learned to use a script initialized in my
~/.config/openbox/autostart, that uses qiv or feh and xprop to set the right
background image every time I change desktop area's. My user environment stays stable,
my keybindings stay stable, and most of the time my {expletive deleted} mouse can sit
by the phone, collecting dust. And the best part is that {so far} nobody messes with
openbox's comfortable user designed user interface.
Alternatively I like lxqt better than lxde or xfce, But I can work with any of those
long enough to get my openbox settings up and running... Then I kind of forget their
there...
Yeah, I noticed that dolphin_oracle said something about unetbootin... My Mageiaskidoo wrote:jtwdyp, the provided tools in antiX and in MX are very flexible.
Unless your PC cannot boot from USB pendrive, you can skip the step"create a CD from the iso".
system has a similar tool called isodumper, but there may be an issue, THEIR download
page says all of their isos are compatible with flash drive installs, but cautions
against using unetbootin. So if the antiX iso wants unetbootin, I'm not sure
isodumper will work for it. I know it didn't work for my opensuse installation. But
blank dvd's are cheap, and I've got a package of 50 just sitting there, collecting dust.
But wait a minute let me check... YUP UNetbootin is available on opensuse so I just
did an:
Code: Select all
zypper in unetbootin
I presume the liveusb has easy to follow instructions to do those things on it.You can boot the liveUSB, setup persistence, make your customizations and:
If you wish, install to HDD from the pendrive. Your customizations will be carried over to the HDD install.
If you wish, use the live-remaster tool during a liveUSB session, to create one/various customized bootable pendrives.
especially the"setup persistence" part so that any work I put into customizing it
will carry over to my eventual hard drive install...
Thank you! If I'm unable to disable the use of a display manager {see above} I willjtwdyp, search these forums for"openbox".
Last September or so, someone bent on"keeping OB, just like my crunchybang..." did that: added openbox (and lightDM) to an antix15 system.
hunt that thread down.
Yeah, well I'm kind of used to that. Opensuse does a good job with the openbox menu.IIRC, nope, the antix-menu-manager doesn't autocreate openbox desktop menu entries.
You'll be resigned to hand-editing (obmenuconf utility?) your openbox menu each time you remove or install additional applications.
But on most of the systems I've used it on, the menu is kind of static and not very
good for finding new applications. But I start most things from the command line or
with keybindings anyway. And one of the reasons I add lxpanel to my openbox session
is that unlike openbox's menu, lxpanel's embedded menu is usually automatically updated.
I'm a very keyboard centric user. I don't have the right kind of dexterity to use aWhat feature(s), what benefit, does openbox provide which fluxbox lacks?
FWIW, that's a pointed question. I'm not aware of any significant benefits.
I don't pay attention to stuff like"can rearrange order of titlebar max/minimiz/close buttons".
Maybe openbox natively provides compositing/transparency (fluxbox does not) and that feature is important to you?
mouse well. But even from a virtual console I can put a copy of of my existing file
in any distribution's ~/.config/openbox/rc.xml. And assuming the same applications are
installed, my keybindings will work from the get go. I organize around my 12"desktop
areas" some of which have a dedicated purpose. For example I open anything related to
email or newsgroups in the one called with <ctrl>+<F2> <ctrl>+<F12> is where I'd open a
root konsole {though I'd run a system upgrade from a virtual console... only had to have
X crash in the middle of an upgrade once...}
My fingers know which keybinding to use to get to the right desktop area, each of
which has a separate background image. So if I fat fingered <ctrl>+<F3> instead of
<ctrl>+<F2> I'd notice before I opened a second instance of my alpine mailclint...
A LONG time ago I liked kde3 But that changed when they dumped kde4 on me.
the dev's wanted to make me use my computer their way, instead of mine... Wasn't gonna happen!
I tried enlightenment. And for a while was happy with E16. But E17 changed the
keybinding settings to a mouse intensive gui edit, and then every couple months
they'd change something that would trash my old keybindings and make me fight with
the mouse all day to put my keybindings back in... That all changed when I learned to
edit my own ~/.config/openbox/rc.xml. And learned to use a script initialized in my
~/.config/openbox/autostart, that uses qiv or feh and xprop to set the right
background image every time I change desktop area's. My user environment stays stable,
my keybindings stay stable, and most of the time my {expletive deleted} mouse can sit
by the phone, collecting dust. And the best part is that {so far} nobody messes with
openbox's comfortable user designed user interface.
Alternatively I like lxqt better than lxde or xfce, But I can work with any of those
long enough to get my openbox settings up and running... Then I kind of forget their
there...
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
#10
Good. Cause Puppy did that stuff right. But to have access to anything in debian
testing on an updatable/customizable liveUSB is like a dream come true...
I'd like to thank you all for the helpful responses. They made it easy to decide what
to install...
Thanks
masinick wrote:I hope that I left the correct citation in here; I knocked out a lot of stuff to address just a couple of things:
1. re. the reference to Puppy: Both antiX and the current generation of MX owe at least some of the persistence functionality to work that has been experimented and honed over the years in Puppy, (and undoubtedly experimented with elsewhere as well, including in antiX and to some extent in MX). Both antiX and MX have definite benefits: antiX is one of the top platforms to use in order to customize a system to suit yourself.
Good. Cause Puppy did that stuff right. But to have access to anything in debian
testing on an updatable/customizable liveUSB is like a dream come true...
Does to me... In any case, Ill be downloading an antiX-15 iso shortly...3. The repo listing that you provide updates only Debian Testing binaries plus Opera. With this, you'd typically be able to keep most screens and menus from an old system, such as MEPIS 11, but in reality you're running Debian Testing with a MEPIS 11 display (or antiX 11, or whatever distribution you started with). Does that make sense?
I'd like to thank you all for the helpful responses. They made it easy to decide what
to install...
Thanks
-
skidooPosts: 1,445
- Joined: 09 Feb 2012
#11
I got too few brain cells to dedicate any toward memorizing keybinds.
Sometimes, in between watching cat videos and running to the store to buy lottery tickets, I do manage to memorize a few keybinds but I just wind up forgetting 'em overnight and have to start all over again.
What the heck is a"mouse well"? Bet you made that up and are just pulling my leg.I'm a very keyboard centric user. I don't have the right kind of dexterity to use a mouse well.
I got too few brain cells to dedicate any toward memorizing keybinds.
Sometimes, in between watching cat videos and running to the store to buy lottery tickets, I do manage to memorize a few keybinds but I just wind up forgetting 'em overnight and have to start all over again.
-
rust collectorPosts: 765
- Joined: 27 Dec 2011
#12
Either that, or a mouse well would be an old style mouse trap, where the mouse falls into a bucket (well), and can not get out?
I have problems using those too. same with the glue traps. It just seems like a mean way to treat animals.
I guess he is saying he can not use"it" (the mouse)" well". (in a good way).skidoo wrote:What the heck is a"mouse well"? Bet you made that up and are just pulling my leg.I'm a very keyboard centric user. I don't have the right kind of dexterity to use a mouse well.
Either that, or a mouse well would be an old style mouse trap, where the mouse falls into a bucket (well), and can not get out?
I have problems using those too. same with the glue traps. It just seems like a mean way to treat animals.
-
masinickPosts: 1,139
- Joined: 26 Apr 2008
#13
I've been around since the days of General Electric ASR 33 Teletype devices with paper tape readers and mainframe systems with punch cards, followed by display terminals with white, amber, or green text, so I can get around the keyboard fluently as well.
Back when I did a lot of development script work and software kit building, I had short commands, one, two, or three character alias entries for the most commonly used commands, and function keys mapped to many common commands. I also had multiple text editors with multiple custom interfaces so that I could use them interchangeably across diverse systems. Along that line, I had commands and aliases to access many different systems across not only my team's subnet, but across any systems that supported or interacted with the activities I worked on.
As GUI-based systems became more prevalent, I created a mix of capabilities that allowed me to take advantage of both console commands and one or two click systems. Any system requiring a lot of clicks was something I either found an"accelerator" for, or something I avoided if possible.
But like so many other things, times changed, the companies and systems I used changed, and it became more and more difficult to bring my toolchest of commands along with me, so I adapted. I understand and appreciate both the"old way" of doing things and the current generation. Each has their features, benefits and constraints. The more of them I know, the more flexible I can be to meet my next work challenge. I do keep my old bag of tricks on a few of my personal systems to this day.
Back when I did a lot of development script work and software kit building, I had short commands, one, two, or three character alias entries for the most commonly used commands, and function keys mapped to many common commands. I also had multiple text editors with multiple custom interfaces so that I could use them interchangeably across diverse systems. Along that line, I had commands and aliases to access many different systems across not only my team's subnet, but across any systems that supported or interacted with the activities I worked on.
As GUI-based systems became more prevalent, I created a mix of capabilities that allowed me to take advantage of both console commands and one or two click systems. Any system requiring a lot of clicks was something I either found an"accelerator" for, or something I avoided if possible.
But like so many other things, times changed, the companies and systems I used changed, and it became more and more difficult to bring my toolchest of commands along with me, so I adapted. I understand and appreciate both the"old way" of doing things and the current generation. Each has their features, benefits and constraints. The more of them I know, the more flexible I can be to meet my next work challenge. I do keep my old bag of tricks on a few of my personal systems to this day.
skidoo wrote:What the heck is a"mouse well"? Bet you made that up and are just pulling my leg.I'm a very keyboard centric user. I don't have the right kind of dexterity to use a mouse well.
I got too few brain cells to dedicate any toward memorizing keybinds.
Sometimes, in between watching cat videos and running to the store to buy lottery tickets, I do manage to memorize a few keybinds but I just wind up forgetting 'em overnight and have to start all over again.
-
skidooPosts: 1,445
- Joined: 09 Feb 2012
#14
Misty watercolored memories \
of the way we were. \
Could it be that life was so simple then \
or has time rewritten every line
{sniffle.}
{What? No, I musta just had a piece of dust in my eye...}
Memories, light the corners of my mind. \I've been around since the days of General Electric ASR 33 Teletype devices
Misty watercolored memories \
of the way we were. \
Could it be that life was so simple then \
or has time rewritten every line
{sniffle.}
{What? No, I musta just had a piece of dust in my eye...}
-
jtwdypPosts: 71
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012
#15
Just to be clear, when I say I can't use a mouse {AKA Rodent AKA Rat} pointing device well, I mean:
A) If I tried to close Iceweasel by clicking on the little x in the corner, Then unless I slow down so much that it would be quicker for me to type the entire first line of this post, I'm just as likely to accidentally maximize it instead.
B) if I use a mouse {non stop} for 15 minutes my carpel tunnel kicks in enough to make my hand go numb.: Just like it does when I try to write on paper for that long. The odd thing is I can keyboard for hours without the same problem. (That's not to say I type quickly, I have to see the keys to type). I do somewhat better with a well designed trackball. But not enough better to make much difference.
C) On my dell laptop I need to disable the touch pad while typing or I'll accidentally change the focus of what I'm typing into. Which is very bad because I'm too busy looking at the keyboard to notice what's happening on the screen till I'm done typing something.
That's why I like openbox. It took me a long time to learn to make it work my way. But at least my keybindings are as portable as my:
A) If I tried to close Iceweasel by clicking on the little x in the corner, Then unless I slow down so much that it would be quicker for me to type the entire first line of this post, I'm just as likely to accidentally maximize it instead.
B) if I use a mouse {non stop} for 15 minutes my carpel tunnel kicks in enough to make my hand go numb.: Just like it does when I try to write on paper for that long. The odd thing is I can keyboard for hours without the same problem. (That's not to say I type quickly, I have to see the keys to type). I do somewhat better with a well designed trackball. But not enough better to make much difference.
C) On my dell laptop I need to disable the touch pad while typing or I'll accidentally change the focus of what I'm typing into. Which is very bad because I'm too busy looking at the keyboard to notice what's happening on the screen till I'm done typing something.
That's why I like openbox. It took me a long time to learn to make it work my way. But at least my keybindings are as portable as my:
Code: Select all
~/.config/openbox/rc.xml