I've been looking at some themes in
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://box-look.org/index.php?xsortmode=down&page=0&xcontentmode=7311"
linktext was:"box-look.org"
====================================
and
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://www.deviantart.com/browse/all/?q=IceWM"
linktext was:"DevianArt"
====================================
for both IceWM and Fluxbox – they objectively look pretty! But which one's lighter in terms of RAM usage, IceWM or Fluxbox?

fluxbox, by about 2MB

Holy moly! Just 95-96 MB of RAM on login (Fluxbox desktop), that's incredibly economical! (just trying out Live CD)

Moby wrote:Holy moly! Just 95-96 MB of RAM on login (Fluxbox desktop), that's incredibly economical! (just trying out Live CD)

If you disable some services, you can get that even less. I've got a 32 bit antiX 15 system that boots to about 60 mbs, but I have wicd, cups (printing), and a bunch of other services disabled. There is a place in the installer to choose services to disable.

and if you want, try a non 4 series kernel...

dirkd wrote:Yup, nothing else. I forgot if I apt-ed or just used synaptics. I switch between them. If I remember well it was a whopping 3 Gb download. Oh, now I remember: it did use synaptics because I remember now that I consciously didn't install some 10 or 20 exotic language packets that were listed along TeX-live in synaptics.

FYI: attached is the list of all 'known' keyboard parameters that you can use in a freshly installed Antix. Colemak is referenced a few times, so I guess you will be OK. I have a not-so-standard keyboard myself (as hardware that is), and I found configuring it in Antix particularly straightforward.

Code: Select all

BIG LIST OF KEYBOARD STUFF

I do not wish to hijack a thread but could you outline how you have retrieved a list of 'known' keyboard parameters and how you go about changing them?

Dave wrote:

dirkd wrote:Yup, nothing else. I forgot if I apt-ed or just used synaptics. I switch between them. If I remember well it was a whopping 3 Gb download. Oh, now I remember: it did use synaptics because I remember now that I consciously didn't install some 10 or 20 exotic language packets that were listed along TeX-live in synaptics.

FYI: attached is the list of all 'known' keyboard parameters that you can use in a freshly installed Antix. Colemak is referenced a few times, so I guess you will be OK. I have a not-so-standard keyboard myself (as hardware that is), and I found configuring it in Antix particularly straightforward.

Code: Select all

BIG LIST OF KEYBOARD STUFF

I do not wish to hijack a thread but could you outline how you have retrieved a list of 'known' keyboard parameters and how you go about changing them?

They are show in in /usr/share/X11/xkb/rules/base.lst . there are some other lists there as well.

anticapitalista wrote:fluxbox, by about 2MB

I have not done any recent memory usage studies, so I find it interesting that Fluxbox currently holds the"low memory usage crown" in antiX.

A few years ago I was on a kick where I was running a lot of fast booting, low usage systems - and not surprisingly antiX did very well in all of my studies and efforts. I also did a lot of comparisons of Live boot systems, and again antiX fared well; not always #1 in every category, but consistently providing great services with nominal overhead.

What's interesting to me is that 4-5 years ago, or whenever it was that I was conducting my research, I would consistently find a basic IceWM setup the lightest consumer of memory, beating even Fluxbox, JWM, fvwm, and Openbox by anywhere from 1-5 MB. I used IceWM systems in the 2005-2010 years that consumed only 57 MB of memory at startup; every other window manager used anywhere from 58 MB - 62 MB at the time (still pretty efficient). I've always been a fan of IceWM because it's very easily extensible, can even be modified to mimic other desktop systems and it's a bit easier to"teach" new users who still need a fast, light system.

I find the"experienced" people tend to prefer Fluxbox because it lends itself to extensible behavior too and it has the"right click" menu access that early, old time X Window System users from eighties vintage UNIX and early nineties Linux systems are frequently familiar with. I'm glad that antiX offers both; I'm also glad that we usually make IceWM the default - I may have been one of the first to make that recommendation because veterans can easily change window managers but new Linux users will find IceWM slightly easier to use. The fact that it still competes well in memory usage comparisons doesn't hurt either. __{{emoticon}}__

Dave wrote:how you have retrieved a list of 'known' keyboard parameters

that"long list" looks like the output from
$ man xkeyboard-config

hello again,
I've installed AntiX 15 Base but I'm having trouble with Colemak keyboard layout -- no way to install it! I've tried to install through script just as I did in Debian 7 KDE, but nothing happens! In Control Centre > Session > Change key mapping is of no help. Here's the Terminal's response (I've set Italian for my system's language so 'Scaricati' translates to 'Downloads'): Why can't AntiX detect the new keyboard layout that has been installed and why doesn't it permit me to choose this layout and its options via GUI?
Without a speedy keyboard I can't take care of the OTHER bugs such as Suspension-to-RAM not working, the excessive screen brightness that can't be diminished via 'Fn' keys etc.

EDIT
Forget about it! I've managed to install the keyboard layout via CLI. I had forgot to install the script, system-wide with root permission, the following commands did the magick: EDIT 2
Nope! Nothing! Once you log out and log back in, OS reverts to QWERTY! I'm guessing some problem of permission, but can't really name it!

May help. May not. I am no keyboard guru. But I know how to cruise the linux file system.

Well I would think that the easiest way to achieve this is to add your commands....

Moby wrote:

Code: Select all

$ chmod u+x ./install-dreymar-xmod.sh 
$ ./install-dreymar-xmod.sh -ox 
$ chmod u+x ./setxkb.sh 
$ ./setxkb.sh -l"it(cmk_ed_us)" -o 'capslock=capslock' -s '5n it us'

.... to ~/.profile, or ~/.bashrc, or a window manager startup, or the session startup script (/ etc / desktop-session / startup or ~ / . desktop-session / startup)


Edit: though I think for it to be proper it needs to be in / etc / default / keyboard

Dave wrote: Edit: though I think for it to be proper it needs to be in / etc / default / keyboard

The script should take care of it, at least in Debian 7 (KDE) it did. I just retouched few options manually via GUI, but other than that, the layout was set and wouldn't switch back to QWERTY after shutdown/reboot. In Debian I had to go to System Settings > Keyboard settings > Advanced tab and there I had the option to choose from different layouts including DVORAK, Colemak and different Locales. Anything similar here in AntiX?
How would I add those commands to the following paths you suggested?

Dave wrote:(/ etc / desktop-session / startup or ~ / . desktop-session / startup

Please see the zip file of these installation scripts, there's a README file too though it's not very helpful, IMHO. I tried installing it again, as root ( 'su' command in Terminal). Initially it seemed to work but when I rebooted, the video was scrambled, the Desktop was half black and half white rectangles. I had to restart the computer by keeping the ON/OFF switch pressed for 2 minutes. I did a memTest86 and rebooted. Now the desktop's back but the keyboard layout is gone and I had to redo the whole installation process through CLI before typing this on the Forum.

masinick wrote: I would consistently find a basic IceWM setup the lightest consumer of memory, beating even Fluxbox, JWM, fvwm, and Openbox by anywhere from 1-5 MB. I used IceWM systems in the 2005-2010 years that consumed only 57 MB of memory at startup; every other window manager used anywhere from 58 MB - 62 MB at the time

So IceWM is lighter than Fluxbox and easily customizable by new Linux user like me? As soon as I fix this keyboard problem I'm going to try it out.

Perhaps I should reinstall AntiX, but this time opt for FULL version instead of AntiX 15 BASE?

@Moby, I did those stats comparing the environments quite some time ago, so it's difficult to make an accurate comparison (unless I run a completely new study) with today's light window managers. What I can tell you with certainly is that when you are running JUST a window manager and no applications, all of them are within a couple of MB in memory consumption, and all of them are light (high fifties to low sixties) with, as I emphasize, JUST the window managers, no extra"dressing" and no apps running.

So whatever WM you choose to run, you're gonna be fine with antiX. You also mention Full Vs. Base. You can't go wrong either way, but if you are not yet familiar with the intricacies of setting stuff up, go with Full, then add, remove, or customize until you end up with what you want.

All of the antiX solutions work just fine with anything built within the past five to seven years. With careful management, you can probably get them to work on anything clear back to 2005-2006, which is the era from which the original release of antiX was built (2006 first release). MEPIS, the parent, was brand new, with its first build released to the public in May 2003, so I speculate that most of it works - though there may be certain software - drivers in particular, that have changed -new drivers that were not in the older editions, and a few drivers that used to be in the older editions that are no longer present. Only hardware no longer supported might present issues, otherwise systems that old would work fine with the antiX of today.

masinick wrote:[…]when you are running JUST a window manager and no applications, all of them are within a couple of MB in memory consumption, and all of them are light (high fifties to low sixties) with, as I emphasize, JUST the window managers, no extra"dressing" and no apps running.
So whatever WM you choose to run, you're gonna be fine with antiX.

~60 MB at login is incredibly low in memory consumption and that's great for me! __{{emoticon}}__

masinick wrote:You also mention Full Vs. Base. You can't go wrong either way, but if you are not yet familiar with the intricacies of setting stuff up, go with Full, then add, remove, or customize until you end up with what you want.

Yes, I think I'll do that. I will download/burn/install from CD the Full version of antiX 15. I hope this time the screen brightness can be lowered with the 'Fn' key of my hp laptop, I can only try and see how this goes down…

As to the original question of this thread,"Should I install AntiX or not?" the answer is 'Yes, if you like it's frugal and content-oriented approach'. Consequently, I'm marking this discussion as 'SOLVED'. Thanks to everyone who participated! I'll definitely come back to the Forum in case I run into some glitch after the install.